linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] thermal: devfreq

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 9 Jun 2021 11:15:24 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, amitk@...nel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] thermal: devfreq_cooling: Fix kernel-doc

On 6/9/2021 11:02 AM, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 12:22 AM Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fix function name in devfreq_cooling.c comment to remove a
>> warning found by kernel-doc.
>>
>> drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c:479: warning: expecting prototype for
>> devfreq_cooling_em_register_power(). Prototype was for
>> devfreq_cooling_em_register() instead.
>>
>> Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
> 
> I'm ok with leaving my reviewed by on _this_ patch because it's so simple but...
> 
> In general, when sending a follow up version of a patch, it's _not_ ok
> to add a reviewed by tag when a reviewer has not explicitly responded
> with "Reviewed-by: ...".  That provides a false sense that a patch has
> been thoroughly reviewed.  Responding to a patch does not constitute a
> "Reviewed-by:" tag.
> 
> And I might be fine with _this_ patch, but that says nothing about
> Nathan, whom you've also falsely attributed a reviewed by tag here.
> 
> For such a trivial patch, it's not a big deal, but in the future
> please do not do that again.  It's ok to send v2, v3, etc, but wait
> for reviewers to explicitly state such reviewed by tag. The maintainer
> will collect those responses (and can be done so in an automated
> fashion via a tool like b4 (https://pypi.org/project/b4/)) when
> applying patches.

+1 with all that was said above. Tags should be explicitly given, except 
for maybe the "Reported-by" and "Suggested-by" tags if the report or 
suggestion was done in the public forum but it is still polite to ask if 
it is okay to add.

For the record, my reviewed-by tag can stand:

Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>

>> ---
>>
>> Change in v2:
>> --replaced s/clang(make W=1 LLVM=1)/kernel-doc/ in commit.
>> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1442639/
>>
>>   drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c
>> index 3a788ac..5a86cff 100644
>> --- a/drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c
>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c
>> @@ -458,7 +458,7 @@ struct thermal_cooling_device *devfreq_cooling_register(struct devfreq *df)
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devfreq_cooling_register);
>>
>>   /**
>> - * devfreq_cooling_em_register_power() - Register devfreq cooling device with
>> + * devfreq_cooling_em_register() - Register devfreq cooling device with
>>    *             power information and automatically register Energy Model (EM)
>>    * @df:                Pointer to devfreq device.
>>    * @dfc_power: Pointer to devfreq_cooling_power.
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
>>
> 
>