From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ej1-f41.google.com (mail-ej1-f41.google.com [209.85.218.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B7661BAEDC; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 15:51:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.41 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736697073; cv=none; b=LC+wA8DYorVZBgaf0AriLsArxR4BMaVeaUubHm6v4lxJdWMe6bdk4R8MxdHG2nF2paH0TaLAP8g9QvcR7RlAbpvWHOPap2eF4CkvnuPAR6m4WMcjlUIDcooYStz2IAjYjPCSsx3V3DALBr2p7JNzkkNbDZFBnmJhJ2WOPkOpyJw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736697073; c=relaxed/simple; bh=CAjVSJwg2hQJBUdPPkdWwoqTmFKoP7sCht21kA+Dvtc=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=Tnr/3uKebm6rcL6QrfJRJz+ypnu9/bV0MlRg72PAC4PxZnJulxFjXwm9gthVabsFludJ6IbDXvNLgoOu0c8C4GIMfEn8dAYNkzPouRf4Gp68LV+6ZvDd7hcOAdm6ysAGlW/cA4yNWC4y3AUievhkyYGSODW/hQ7gyMObOlda3mA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gompa.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.41 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gompa.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-ej1-f41.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-aa69107179cso676267766b.0; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 07:51:11 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736697070; x=1737301870; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ojo6rpVsQOShQmgPfJGcLHfKrOA2VqG0QBnNPGXTc9w=; b=cb+2TYyMkC/iiETCjlKULPCjfiVvqnJ5pzKmCnisVUSvLEaDI0LYC5j+Vgo5WXc4d8 XAoapUtO07bF/JpeWi6r7JXaOr9iDp23kx7PYkiQhv4WtCMoqoAXtIww2GUtA1jZwn11 EyDVH0EpJ5lSOTAe+mf2N2E4OvRFZuyBL8s/+VOj/ywbi676yXh2+NMnNtjeapDEwm+a 3DJ99rSF/UJO4auyHh5Z/BbHQZWvaUzjWHG3Y2BASwu3/FBdZsuD1KJyMCEnKvXbUGj1 ayeieCZzcKM+MyeAsCm7OtQt0ie0cSyfJDUUJLlIaNhr6l+0W7VypvB+ZnuHZTGF0AXc Y7uQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUUwqbPut+N5STw8NAnQDJHnwfeKNNTlXchAwNGCRC1F3yPwIKm6Z/Nb9KARIG5jHzZ4Ei7yaPXxEfx@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCUWXBHR8gtC0yK8fgUpZPIrSUHBHyk8ZEIsEB0Axgiuk2SP1ek1JSTIOemkgHYtRoR0d6en6UJqjyc=@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCV3CxWDYJlZ9bKkc6/v1+xUwuYCT2SbrHdui4BVPqm4KubLOoRRVd12XDkFJWjXRiTbBaL618UgGWHTBxp+@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw4y+VRk+ShaB1fsZU9kSRtXOqpndzmc407fAIdm9NQzro3OdEk IscGe415wbk1LWDVckGt1JobVWmuLIIqX45qN6UTApM5RSGb96ogcON2OA5qWfw= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctdm+QUq05UUPUJgzbiEMHR3HH2l9X/PyXQ9bywiyXnjXe711Qgpkqxfl8E/QW uOU3ou6ST+pn3sPvj3Ewnzb9xMvfCvGHuDraS3f/WP4g6uyZh6n74EPBnmVmSBhoCI0Yvjufnfl C+a9p24FMbbbFwBd2Xe8Dh0GMzD9in5WtLT/bNy7LhBzGqPklBtToRB+StqkQSkFjC9VkXBjt5J 20lBZjU7oNMK9ZoqUPW8TnCsJ3NCVG9P7IZ3V/cdf8k+hW5zxG4LUkBHgPEcNVAqIs2RA6oU1U5 v0uRs1XwFMY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEGnUZND4N3UywLpGJw/USQH1GlQV6Yp/yTNat/BS8S9sif1gHW5w8UZ+3L2a9285ej9YjkIg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:6d0e:b0:aaf:5c9:19f9 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ab2ab6f3455mr1609669866b.27.1736697069487; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 07:51:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ed1-f53.google.com (mail-ed1-f53.google.com. [209.85.208.53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-ab2c9563ae8sm387243066b.129.2025.01.12.07.51.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 12 Jan 2025 07:51:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ed1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5d3cf094768so6239750a12.0; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 07:51:09 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUxhkST6HKD2Me9eUPrJBzzFCDRyDpxMg3Y324gezUC+eMrb4189OO+AuABxXkmNrewuYjtxaqpCpaJAbvE@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCWblMoKjJQcyPGyMNYpXIIktozwKiojY7v1etW5JZNc6JNet+xyj/+BlN/SDjO8Ep0b52cylkYuUSU=@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCXh7ZRh9jwJ+RT1Y4QGCGgJjecoFPislZyvRdhVh2H2HY1qJdtesL2HA7zkv4gXd/8W0iPD7E72U5RG@vger.kernel.org X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:70c:b0:aa6:7d82:5411 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ab2abc6ca52mr1659041866b.40.1736697069149; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 07:51:09 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250112152946.761150-1-ojeda@kernel.org> <20250112152946.761150-3-ojeda@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20250112152946.761150-3-ojeda@kernel.org> From: Neal Gompa Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 10:50:32 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: X-Gm-Features: AbW1kvbn33SbtjplUZmkNvnmbm5gMpbukWC4yMx1bRK1ShqczijYBGnS7iH4t3o Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] docs: submitting-patches: clarify difference between Acked-by and Reviewed-by To: Miguel Ojeda Cc: Jonathan Corbet , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, Sami Tolvanen , Masahiro Yamada , Luis Chamberlain , tech-board@groups.linuxfoundation.org, Steven Rostedt , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linus Torvalds , Shuah Khan , Dan Williams , "Darrick J. Wong" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 10:30=E2=80=AFAM Miguel Ojeda wr= ote: > > Newcomers to the kernel need to learn the different tags that are > used in commit messages and when to apply them. Acked-by is sometimes > misunderstood, since the documentation did not really clarify (up to > the previous commit) when it should be used, especially compared to > Reviewed-by. > > The previous commit already clarified who the usual providers of Acked-by > tags are, with examples. Thus provide a clarification paragraph for > the comparison with Reviewed-by, and give a couple examples reusing the > cases given above, in the previous commit. > > Acked-by: Shuah Khan > Acked-by: Dan Williams > Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda > --- > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation= /process/submitting-patches.rst > index c7a28af235f7..7b0ac7370cb1 100644 > --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst > +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst > @@ -480,6 +480,12 @@ mergers will sometimes manually convert an acker's "= yep, looks good to me" > into an Acked-by: (but note that it is usually better to ask for an > explicit ack). > > +Acked-by: is also less formal than Reviewed-by:. For instance, maintain= ers may > +use it to signify that they are OK with a patch landing, but they may no= t have > +reviewed it as thoroughly as if a Reviewed-by: was provided. Similarly,= a key > +user may not have carried out a technical review of the patch, yet they = may be > +satisfied with the general approach, the feature or the user-facing inte= rface. > + > Acked-by: does not necessarily indicate acknowledgement of the entire pa= tch. > For example, if a patch affects multiple subsystems and has an Acked-by:= from > one subsystem maintainer then this usually indicates acknowledgement of = just > -- > 2.48.0 > This doesn't make sense as a distinction. What defines "thoroughly"? To be honest, I think you should go the other way and become okay with people sending Reviewed-by tags when people have looked over a patch and consider it good to land. To me, Acked-by mostly makes sense as a tag for people who *won't* review the code, not for those who *will*. Blending Acked-by and Reviewed-by just creates confusion. --=20 =E7=9C=9F=E5=AE=9F=E3=81=AF=E3=81=84=E3=81=A4=E3=82=82=E4=B8=80=E3=81=A4=EF= =BC=81/ Always, there's only one truth!