Re: [PATCH 1/7] xz: add fall-through comments to a switch statement

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan,

On 26/11/2021 07:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 25.11.2021 18:13, Julien Grall wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 25/11/2021 17:03, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > On 25.11.2021 17:54, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > > On 25/11/2021 16:49, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > > > On 19/11/2021 10:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > From: Lasse Collin <lasse.collin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It's good style. I was also told that GCC 7 is more strict and might
> > > > > > give a warning when such comments are missing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Suggested-by: Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lasse Collin <lasse.collin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Actually, any reason why there are some signed-off-by missing?
> > > I often keep the author's, but drop ones which clearly got there only
> > > because of the path a patch has taken through trees.
> > This might be clear for you. For me, as a reviewer, I have to do extra
> > work to check whether you keeped the relevant signed-off-by.
> >
> > > These aren't
> > > relevant imo when pulling over the change;
> > They are technically part of the "chain of approval".
> But the Linux chain of approval is precisely what is of no interest to
> us. We need to approve the change ourselves; Linux having had it
> approved is merely a data point.
I can understand this point of view. But as I wrote above, a reviewer as 
to do extra work to check you correctly propagated the signed-off-by 
(see more below).
> > > I could as well take the
> > > email submission as my basis, after all, where just the single S-o-b
> > > would be there.
> > That's a fair point. That said, you took the commit-as-is from linus.git
> How would you be able to tell?
That's easy. You wrote in your commit message:

[Linux commit: 5a244f48ecbbd03a11eb84819c5c599db81823ee]

That's indicating you used the Linux commit rather than the one on the 
ML. So I will tend to diff the commit and the what's different.
> > so I think we ought to keep them.
> I disagree. And I'd like to remain consistent with what I've been doing
> in the past.
I actually tried to find the original submission but failed. I didn't 
look for long though...
Anyway, I think it would save time for everyone (you had to manually 
delete signed-off-by after all) if you just copy the commit (including 
all the signed-off-by) message as-is.
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall