Re: [PATCH RESEND v2 1/2] dt-bindings: display: simple: add support for InnoLux G070ACE-L01

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 9:45 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 21/04/2023 18:37, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 9:26 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 21/04/2023 18:15, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:51 AM <richard.leitner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>> Add Innolux G070ACE-L01 7" WVGA (800x480) TFT LCD panel compatible
> >>>> string.
> >>>>
> >>>> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> nit: as I understand it, ordering of tags is usually supposed to be
> >>> chronological. You signed off on this patch before Krzysztof acked it,
> >>> so the SoB should be above. I'll fix that when applying.
> >>
> >> Some people agree with this... but b4 disagrees, so I would say the
> >> tools should implement the right process and right decisions. We should
> >> not be correcting the tools' output, unless the tools are not correct -
> >> then fix the tools.
> >
> > Ah, interesting. I checked and as far as I could tell Richard had
> > manually added the tag when sending v2, so I didn't assume it as a
> > tool-added tag. I'm happy to let "b4" be the canonical thing that says
> > what the order should be.
> >
> > OK, so I just tried this and I'm confused. I ran:
> >
> > b4 am -P_ 20230201-innolux-g070ace-v2-2-2371e251dd40@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > ...and when I check the patch that b4 spits out my "Reviewed-by" tag
> > is _after_ the "Signed-off-by" tag, just like I asked for.
> >
> > Just in case Acked-by was somehow different than Reviewed-by, I went
> > back to the original version where you added the Acked-by:
> >
> >  b4 am -P_ 20221118075856.401373-1-richard.leitner@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> > ...and, again, it matches the order that I thought was right. In other
> > words, the patch file generated says:
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> We talk about `b4 trailers`, because the tag is applied by the
> submitter, not by the maintainer.
>
> >
> > Did I get something wrong in the above?
>
> Your `b4 am` will of course put the tag later, because it is you who
> applies the tag.

Ah, got it. So I guess from the perspective of "b4" every time the
author modifies a patch (like adding new tags to it) then it's a new
application of Signed-off-by and thus the old Signed-off-by is removed
from the top and a new one is added below all the tags that have been
received. Thus if b4 grabs all the tags off the mailing list for
applying it ends up in a different order than if it grabs all the tags
off the mailing list for sending a new version.

OK, I can understand that perspective. I'll keep it in mind.

-Doug