linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mfd: Use full path to other schemas

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

Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 10:31:55 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mfd: Use full path to other schemas

On 03/05/2024 10:24, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 03 May 2024, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 
>> On 03/05/2024 10:08, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/3/24 08:21, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>  .../bindings/mfd/samsung,s2mpa01.yaml         |  2 +-
>>>>  .../bindings/mfd/samsung,s2mps11.yaml         | 12 ++---
>>>>  .../bindings/mfd/samsung,s5m8767.yaml         |  4 +-
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
>>
>> So this should be Ack. You cannot review part of the patch ("I have
>> carried out a technical review of this patch...").
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.8-rc5/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> 
> Reviewed-by is totally appropriate here.

Submitting patches is clear on that:
"A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the patch is an"
Not "the patch or part of patch"

And ack:
" It is a record that the acker has at least reviewed the patch ....
Acked-by: does not necessarily indicate acknowledgement of the entire
patch."

So no, reviewing part of the patch means you Ack it. Especially that in
git log the Rb tag will suggest entire patch was reviewed, while it was
not true. Review of 80% of patch did not happen.

Best regards,
Krzysztof