From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 16:03:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH 01 of 11] mmu-notifier-core In-Reply-To: <20080507223914.GG8276@duo.random> Message-ID: References: <20080507130528.adfd154c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080507215840.GB8276@duo.random> <20080507222758.GD8276@duo.random> <20080507223914.GG8276@duo.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Roland Dreier , npiggin@suse.de, chrisw@redhat.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, marcelo@kvack.org, kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, kanojsarcar@yahoo.com, steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, avi@qumranet.com, aliguori@us.ibm.com, paulmck@us.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, holt@sgi.com, general@lists.openfabrics.org, hugh@veritas.com, Andrew Morton , dada1@cosmosbay.com, clameter@sgi.com List-ID: On Thu, 8 May 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > Ok so I see the problem Linus is referring to now (I received the hint > by PM too), I thought the order of the signed-off-by was relevant, it > clearly isn't or we're wasting space ;) The order of the signed-offs are somewhat relevant, but no, sign-offs don't mean authorship. See the rules for sign-off: you can sign off on another persons patches, even if they didn't sign off on them themselves. That's clause (b) in particular. So yes, quite often you'd _expect_ the first sign-off to match the author, but that's a correlation, not a causal relationship. Linus -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org