From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964842AbbJ1Hru (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 03:47:50 -0400 Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:44544 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S964779AbbJ1Hrs (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 03:47:48 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Saravana Kannan , linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, open list Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/5] cpufreq: create cpu/cpufreq/policyX directories Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:16:45 +0100 Message-ID: <4167825.7F75u7l572@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/4.1.0-rc5+; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20151016055118.GR19018@linux> References: <561FFDA7.3080903@codeaurora.org> <20151016055118.GR19018@linux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, October 16, 2015 11:21:18 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 15-10-15, 12:25, Saravana Kannan wrote: > > Btw, does a Review-by have an implicit Acked-by? > > I have attended a session at Linaro Connect where this was discussed > and the answer was: > > Acked-by: is more of a general agreement from the person that he is > fine with the patch, but he might not have done a very careful review > and he isn't really responsible for the patch's content. > > Reviewed-by: is a more strict tag and implies that the reviewer has > reviewed it at his best and he is as much responsible for the content > of the patch as the author. That's a bit too much IMO. It means "I have carried out a detailed review of this patch and haven't found problems in it." How much responsibility that implies is not so clear (evidently, there are differing opinions regarding that). Thanks, Rafael