From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=95.215.58.207 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793867662; b=VdV/16zpuKwmymXdnvtBBhxlLsonHjvGLQcVLGuFRf9Y2/S6Y8sjByAe70ASykLBrTNB 8hjHL3r7iw4mtbZhJTfannAPqw+Gju9TcF8mg1vneCF5Q4Srxgz+uRvs4FRxCo1lrdZ0m WSJ/gVHge6Hw9L9haDZyi+Z4FEx1FdK6f2EPjtdMyzdFHhoxscYytRnWM3uo6LaA+Q0KL hQgcPRdR699TJDXE9Mn6ETuFpLalvbO8CeGT+GTpk4mXTVeETFcL+Rf2zJCGZeFcFQNs0 riU+8cIMk/P/F5E1AVrAkdRRwfZcokGAif0Lkbu6dNj0CHifNkzWT2nNJJK9mosg2Eg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793867662; h=DMARC-Filter:X-Envelope-To:DKIM-Signature:X-Envelope-To:Received: X-Mizu-Trace-ID:X-Migadu-Flow:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; bh=cnhqM65tjsKZGGJY/TXRPudsFhxJteMdDEVDYcPFQSc=; b=AG4yPq0xsE4WDLPLBzpbMUtACz6CIHwiyZhBdaLzYWUtI5MzFHC+M9KZ1lFsHOiFRk4d IAD3deJSepWhqpHcL9+bc9OdZ6EG7yz01dmBOofZIyb8/yCDzttl+xceDfuQKz2IEsBUn Ibp4gwxbA6hSX/fmgjirlPFJzRgj0si5YdjmxIfHBjptsBPtD4EhRAHLXn5u10No2rSVy nTiY/aqRAnLRS0hmq6Grss4VMHiERgKtVLw4Lrhq2V56Fq/xZvgJNRsP25BmrON3XhbiB BFt0LiUh9dAMNwK0zkJc8rHrbUSpWrrwXt3M+0nH4An9myN+G1OXciukbPLlCWVah3A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=wyuan.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wyuan.org; dkim=pass header.d=wyuan.org header.i=@wyuan.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=noWlk7ff; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=95.215.58.207 Received: from mta1.migadu.com (out-207.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.207]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13DAB606A32D for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2026 08:34:19 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 13DAB606A32D Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=wyuan.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wyuan.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=wyuan.org header.i=@wyuan.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=noWlk7ff X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=zClrcHGLDzT23aIyNgtsDXJndZr3lkUPgSp0Qa+dhfg=; c=simple/simple; d=wyuan.org; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1793867656; v=1; x=1794472456; b=noWlk7ffB+Dzl6UKHGgE4HtHCybgrJIBH3aDepc5o/Ozko5Kyi39D2aOx2NBqeaaKQ1WMrGQ f0UWAftglynJikvNw5HB16mFmy9p3HxfLJa4ugmNmq/mxjdUEmGB+wdWm9e5syYFpWmwxnIGwV+ Ke3oRw3vJQSaitGmfHEXsBrjrF3BD4Bf8Rco2ZCLLa0jCT+OtB8fBuY5Wx2gKeOsHzUnagZDzIv Fhm6EIDgbu4MAmsQwWpf5knSZpD4bYFB1EkT/EG1mqvxHkIA71mki0qjEgKsoJfR4T7XOgS0OPb s1VGEzCbXGYAAOxfYs+P8SvMROtIyB/+8JNoJbDYEjFTA== X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id 2606b68ee5890bc3; Thu, 05 Nov 2026 08:34:12 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: 2606b68ee5890bc3 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2026 16:34:02 +0800 From: Weijie Yuan To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Randy Dunlap , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: submitting-patches: Clarify half-baked review tags Message-ID: References: <20261104171744.439209-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20261104171744.439209-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com> Krzysztof Kozlowski writes: > Refactoring of driver subsystems or some core driver parts often come > with change of the actual drivers. If that happens within one patch, > people giving "Reviewed-by" tag only to piece of the patch, like one > driver, and ignoring entire rest including the main concept of the > patch, are not really reviewing "the patch". > > As explained in Submitting Patches document, the "Reviewer's statement > of oversight" is for patch: > > (a) I have carried out a technical review of this patch to > evaluate its appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into > the mainline kernel. > > The sentence is complete, meaning it does not allow implicit variations > "this patch or part of this patch". Agreed. > Reviewing pieces of patch while ignoring the main part of it, is > much closer to Acknowledgment, thus Ack, and "Reviewed-by" credit should > not be applicable. But in this case, I suspect that your "Acked-by" trailer will still be interpreted as an ack of the entire patch in future git logs, rather than a partial ack and/or a partial review. IMO, it would be better to clearly specify which specific parts I reviewed, like "Reviewed-by: foo # for part a". But if there were no such usage, I would actually think it would be better not to give any type of trailers. > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski > > --- > > And let me even bring a better example. Imagine a patch, doing massive > refactoring of core SPI stuff, 1000 lines of code, complex locking and > also simultaneously updates drivers to the new API changed in here. > > Reviewing that 1000 lines of code in core SPI with complex locking takes > someone 30 minutes. He gives Rb tag, gets credit. > > Now another person comes, looks at a SINGLE line in one driver he is > responsible for and gives Rb tag. For 10 seconds job of looking at one > changed call in one driver. Yup, therefore, we better suggest that the latter should not give out any trailers, or explicitly state which parts I have reviewed. That said, my understanding of these is not as profound as yours. Thanks. > --- > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst > index f271d7413f72..d2aa31bdee1e 100644 > --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst > +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst > @@ -585,6 +585,8 @@ serves to give credit to reviewers and to inform maintainers of the degree of > review which has been done on the patch. Reviewed-by: tags, when supplied by > reviewers known to understand the subject area and to perform thorough reviews, > will normally increase the likelihood of your patch getting into the kernel. > +If the reviewer checks only piece of the patch, leaving the rest unreviewed, > +then more appropriately is Acked-by tag. > > Both Tested-by and Reviewed-by tags, once received on mailing list from tester > or reviewer, should be added by author to the applicable patches when sending > -- > 2.53.0 > > >