From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754954Ab3LTJLp (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 20 Dec 2013 04:11:45 -0500
Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:50009 "EHLO
	merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753999Ab3LTJLj (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 20 Dec 2013 04:11:39 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 10:11:13 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, efault@gmx.de,
        jeffm@suse.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, jason.low2@hp.com,
        Waiman.Long@hp.com, tom.vaden@hp.com, scott.norton@hp.com,
        aswin@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] futex: Avoid taking hb lock if nothing to wakeup
Message-ID: <20131220091113.GB21999@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1387478746-5436-1-git-send-email-davidlohr@hp.com>
 <1387478746-5436-5-git-send-email-davidlohr@hp.com>
 <20131219192532.GB564@gmail.com>
 <1387481345.5494.1.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
 <20131219194213.GA824@gmail.com>
 <1387492517.2353.29.camel@joe-AO722>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1387492517.2353.29.camel@joe-AO722>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 02:35:17PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 20:42 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 20:25 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > * Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
> > > > 
> > > > So, that's not a valid SOB sequence either, the person sending me a 
> > > > patch should be the last person in the SOB chain 
> > > 
> > > Which is why I had it like that in the original version.
> > 
> > The problem with that order was that the first person should be the 
> > primary author and in the 'From' tag.
> > 
> > A SOB chain is intended to depict the true propagation/route of a 
> > patch, from author, through maintainers who handle and forward it, to 
> > the maintainer who applies it to a Git tree. The patch starts up with 
> > a single SOB (the primary author's) and every 'hop' after that adds a 
> > SOB to the tail of the existing SOB chain.
> 
> Multiple "Signed-off-by:"s are also used when there are
> multiple authors of a single patch.

Abused; which is exactly what we're saying is not correct.

While doing so we've also found people abusing SoB where Reviewed-by was
meant and other 'creative' use.