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 09:39:50 +0100
From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: 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 5/3/24 09:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 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.

Thanks, Krzysztof, I'll keep in mind next time. I now confirm I went
through all the substitutions and they look good to me. R-b now applies
to all the changes.

ta