linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] docs: submitting-patches: describe preserving review/test tags

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJKOXPe5Jw7iXmai234Za=x3X5qXDyGM1ECVtQcNuL+0cXyP3A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Oct 2020 19:18:55 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: submitting-patches: describe preserving review/test tags

On Fri, 9 Oct 2020 at 17:38, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
>
> On Wed,  7 Oct 2020 10:43:06 +0200
> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > From time to time, the novice kernel contributors do not add Reviewed-by
> > or Tested-by tags to the next versions of the patches.  Mostly because
> > they are unaware that responsibility of adding these tags in next
> > version is on submitter, not maintainer.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 7 +++++++
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> > index 58586ffe2808..9752b6311674 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> > @@ -527,6 +527,13 @@ 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.
> >
> > +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
> > +next versions.  However if the patch is changed in following version, these
> > +tags might not be applicable anymore and thus should be removed.  Usually
> > +removal of someone's Tested-by or Reviewed-by tags should be mentioned
> > +in the patch changelog (after '---' separator).
>
> after *the* "---" separator
>
> This is a bit ambiguous, though, since the point of sending a new version
> of a patch is usually that it has changed.  I'm not quite sure how to best
> articulate when a patch has changed enough that reviews and such are no
> longer applicable...  If nothing else, "if the patch *has changed
> substantially*" or something like that?

Yes, it is ambiguous because different people see the amount of
changes invalidating tags differently. I do not think we could make
the paragraph above stricter and formalize such rule. I'll rework it
to match your choice of wording.

Best regards,
Krzysztof