Re: [PATCH v2] docs: submitting-patches: Clarify half-baked review tags

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 09:27:30AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 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 the rest including the main concept of the patch,
> are not really reviewing "the patch".
> 
> As explained in the Submitting Patches document, the "Reviewer's
> statement of oversight" is for patch as in "entire patch" meaning:
> 
>   (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 explicit and complete, meaning it does not allow
> implicit variations like: "this patch or part of this patch".
> 
> Reviewing pieces of the patch while ignoring the main part of it, is
> much closer to Acknowledgment, thus Ack, and "Reviewed-by" credit should
> not be applicable.

I strongly disagree. It's all explained in the plenty threads you have started
on the Subject.

TL;DR: As a reviewer for the piece in question I have done my part fully. It's
not my issue that the piece is bundled into a single patch. We have options:
1) ask to split (and review as standalone piece);
2) add (partial) Rb with the pointers of what exactly has been reviewed;
3) ignore (silent agreement with the respective subsystem maintainer's opinion);
4) ...something I forgot?..

(even partial) Rb != Ack.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko