From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C12A9C433FE for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 08:58:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1345971AbiDZI7I (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Apr 2022 04:59:08 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60666 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1346752AbiDZIpU (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Apr 2022 04:45:20 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-x22a.google.com (mail-oi1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EF15B1C9; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 01:35:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id r8so19913570oib.5; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 01:35:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=mn6wvVHUr2ZjEGUHwg6ZBaeE1qpv9Jm8HoWE6ChaE5w=; b=Cjyh57ww3jEqGpCEOjpaagYrIbnQDkIVSg56cj65shwf5FOtqPWIsfKCgOYSnf8+JP OkaRxiKrKynR9oM/7/X9CJf/suN464U7DRxIMwDXVBJvH2oUr/5Ucyr5bTSZ6XKa+XlH s30BaQTKJ4G2fMqTsKqR4RlUItkgeY3xuQjIJ0OAi6dCYv9/6ukkPN/D83E+UAAP4kUv E8rL0Uv4aVP8tsRLYPJlyZxXI2QuTPC9WFGNgvgX6KoX1nwefGAOt5KC1EOE8BAHmEyT FdLBt3j+KUAdm3EX7ZB63fYmszLiYc9pWw5K0/GmbYixLkoc2BSgf8yxsjPhuuaQR3h1 QEug== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent :subject:content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=mn6wvVHUr2ZjEGUHwg6ZBaeE1qpv9Jm8HoWE6ChaE5w=; b=b81sfHnLuZuD8r1rvw1moTNsu74M3j++7YfFP3U/7EljJFo2f6WAyuNXd1bT5BfvP2 2+Hvdic6hHA2EP6M/hH5msNepH6+RZBCWNV88ZAYH0P1zCMMR7YkmZ/n63h7WHQO0pow 3PpSzp5994Pf+/pV0YUI5ZKN1sy9+7HxovssJIhmk+TiJ9FNCkb5ph0LG63IHGUDh0J1 612GKlG5EBf2MlJ/TrmyoqdFBi6pWidOJY7i7zj4a8cpeN9y7Zfz08iBkAD/l9NgQrN7 YdznlTpKJ2OACKGzOm2hwV6w35gM5t7yjO8FNgcZMJGGVDmkFP2arbLsZAEInyoPxDV6 uhmA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531BQ2gNk5fl5P17znTRjzAOnTr8sLkmW63k0kv+h9Y9Gi4eGxp1 s6mpDs1pDef5N5mGMZwIuFY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx86nfNuiQLtsN7uS6ZBCx9NR+9viNEVO1HJOBKCs5hKA6oKSltL6O7UKG6m6hPSsD0t3LT/g== X-Received: by 2002:a54:4010:0:b0:322:4560:1a84 with SMTP id x16-20020a544010000000b0032245601a84mr9736428oie.40.1650962127005; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 01:35:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c? ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g11-20020a9d5f8b000000b00605bff9c2dbsm1327902oti.42.2022.04.26.01.35.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Apr 2022 01:35:20 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: <275d7e40-a4bf-624a-6072-9750c6cb1ff0@roeck-us.net> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 01:35:18 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] watchdog: iTCO_wdg: Make code more clearly with macro definition Content-Language: en-US To: "liuxp11@chinatelecom.cn" , wim , Tzung-Bi Shih Cc: linux-watchdog , linux-kernel References: <1650957029-910-1-git-send-email-liuxp11@chinatelecom.cn> <1650957029-910-5-git-send-email-liuxp11@chinatelecom.cn> <2022042616273282549226@chinatelecom.cn> From: Guenter Roeck In-Reply-To: <2022042616273282549226@chinatelecom.cn> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 4/26/22 01:27, liuxp11@chinatelecom.cn wrote: > On 4/26/22 00:10, Liu Xinpeng wrote: > > Using SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS reduces redundant code. > > > > Signed-off-by: Liu Xinpeng > > Reviewed-by: Tzung-Bi Shih > Also, Tzung-Bi never sent a Reviewed-by: tag. As with the other patches, > this is completely inappropriate. Really, who gave you that idea ? > You adding such tags without receiving them means we can never trust > your patches again since you are making things up. > Guenter > -->Very sorry about this. I am not clearly when need to add "Reviewed-by: tag", > Just expressing thanks. > If you get a Reviewed-by: tag for a patch, you keep it in the next version of that patch unless there are substantial changes. You _never_ add one yourself. Guenter