Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Documentation: fix "should be use" grammar in ABI README

On 7/27/26 10:48 PM, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 09:31:35PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>> 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.
> 
> Ah, I remember this part. But I tend to believe that this description is
> only relevant to the issue of the order of Co-authored-by and
> Signed-off-by, if I were the newcomer reading this for the first time.
> (In fact, I actually am a newcomer compared with you ;-))

Yes, that's understandable.

> That is to say, when dealing with multiple authors, we suggest using
> trailers to represent the sequence of authors in chronological order.
> 
> Then, this will facilitate subsequent readers to understand the
> development history of the patch through the order of the trailers.(?)
> 
> And, aren't these subsequent examples merely confining the discussion to
> these two trailers?

They seem to be but that's just a documentation deficiency IMO.

> ---
> <changelog>
> 
> Co-developed-by: First Co-Author <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: First Co-Author <[email protected]>
> Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: From Author <[email protected]>
> ---
> 
> Besides the submitting-patches file, It seems to me that the probability
> of "Signed-off-by" appearing on the last line is much higher than in
> other cases. Is this a usual practice? It seems that everyone tacitly
> agreed to write "Acked-by" and "Reviewed-by" at the top, even though
> they occurred after "Sob".
> 

I chose 2 files and looked at their "git log" history: MAINTAINERS and
kernel/panic.c. In those files I see corroboration of my "claim," so I'm
satisfied with it.

> But of course, you have much more experience in this area, so my limited
> observations may not be very representative.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> ps. The Git project explicitly stipulates "Place this `Signed-off-by:`
> trailer at the end". So at first, I wasn't quite sure about it.

-- 
~Randy