Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Documentation: fix "should be use" grammar in ABI README
Randy Dunlap <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Jul 2026 21:31:35 -0700
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-edac,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-media |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 7/27/26 9:24 PM, Weijie Yuan wrote: > Hi 秉坤, > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 12:12:11PM +0800, 岳秉坤 wrote: >> Fix "should be use" -> "should use" in Documentation/ABI/README. > > The diff below already documents that the changes is in > "Documentation/ABI/README". I'm not sure if it is proper to write like > this. But I also do not know what's the best practice to write commit > messages for typos. Hope some friends could provide a better answer ;-) > Of course, if the maintainer thinks it's okay, I'll be definitely fine > with it. > >> Signed-off-by: 岳秉坤 <[email protected]> >> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]> > > Usually, your "Signed-off-by" should be the last trailer. Hm, I disagree. The -by: lines are somewhat in chronological order, so this looks fine to me. Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst says: """ Standard sign-off procedure applies, i.e. the ordering of Signed-off-by: tags should reflect the chronological history of the patch insofar as possible, regardless of whether the author is attributed via From: or Co-developed-by:. Notably, the last Signed-off-by: must always be that of the developer submitting the patch. """ Yes, this doesn't address Acked-by: or Reviewed-by: lines, but in my experience, chronological order applies to all of them. >> --- >> Documentation/ABI/README | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/README b/Documentation/ABI/README >> index 315fffe1f831f..27c962e6a872c 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/ABI/README >> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/README > > Thanks. -- ~Randy