From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6BE747CA64 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 12:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=18.9.28.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787314475; cv=none; b=JZJvuATdZDjgssKFRGHH4Mel4mq46TO8EY0AzedNuPmutgxQizg+ZV4g5vGcsZY0DtFYmlRnS2YONEYLp2i0G2RbiQb8/f459DFOGinjOVR5DT0qIOveWcPXSU/PhaXuRBdGLhEkghI1hJbi0U6oHrBfLSpXfqscP0MFvvAKLm8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787314475; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Wo72Tk9QHoGXMmWQL7o8+JHopkhNrBHDS3gmO5K+tCo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RHFAsRrGvLXNphKFCp6xdw+LkN8zgIUD11iq147tptspqZuTEK5YqD4aZcPNGT+novkIYdmK9b5CnNWstU+OBByLfNexNqX3H7UEx7zxWsTIcBzgp26w/RvNKPy5ePhRWwuEV1+NPSPRPfSKbAZE9vCVWNv+K6tY8YsnVVAbeec= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=mit.edu; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mit.edu; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mit.edu header.i=@mit.edu header.b=SXn80QHB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=18.9.28.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=mit.edu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mit.edu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mit.edu header.i=@mit.edu header.b="SXn80QHB" Received: from macsyma.thunk.org (pool-173-48-113-140.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [173.48.113.140]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 67LCE91r016384 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 21 Aug 2026 08:14:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mit.edu; s=outgoing; t=1787314451; bh=I4tbQIkbqCdhMwWbV+5+2csIKQ2Cg5jzhhuQadpiN/c=; h=Date:From:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=SXn80QHBaEwlPVCgYeX/0mciq7fWCDrLti1N4KJq2JVFx+IJICrsghaIfd8ODYWlA fm5NTeKqqkFDN+kywo6gzjPyngomrR1DiHdO7r4mC2Shs+rFnDUVgoVrOXg5aeiE69 ElckssJA/RN5Qixpht0z5toHiU6oYXjVeMTamNyMaf9KwXnqou/fMLCEo3aeliiNS8 hpd0u24FlpycSwoVm+5q0e30pxCDEP9uKuSg5rvCHAColy3rSXN9erNuQpBuFsTNk0 sUzxmNZg1pPHrSsKEF/lQfz5saVNUE0GLIGtWJV4vaHbG8ACp3n4UieswyWH5S9LmC W5SQdq0omhATA== Received: by macsyma.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id 91DC11142069; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 08:13:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 08:13:08 -0400 From: "Theodore Tso" To: Bradley Morgan Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pmladek@suse.com Subject: Re: [RFC] kernel/ review rules Message-ID: References: <20260820180045.5a8b9bde6db2015f214aa75e@linux-foundation.org> <12408214-5B8C-4103-A8D1-FC15D4586F8D@grrlz.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <12408214-5B8C-4103-A8D1-FC15D4586F8D@grrlz.net> On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 08:30:02AM -0500, Bradley Morgan wrote: > >Acked-by: "cool changelog!" As a maintainer, I completely ignore an Acked-by unless it comes from another Maintainer, in which case it means that the other Maintainer is OK with that commit which might affect their subsystem (either directly because it modifies code in their subsystem or indirectly because it changes functions that their subsystem depends upon). As a result I will likely drop an Acked-by and not include it in the git commit descritpion if it comes from a non-Maintainer. > >Reviewed-by: + nothing "cool changelog and I scrolled through it" > >Reviewed-by: + commentary: "I reviewed it!" If there is a reviewed-by, and other problems are discovered by other reviewers, the reputation of the person who submitted the Reviewed-by will go down, and with enough bogus reviewed-by, I will start ignoring that reviewer and drop their Reviewed-by from the git commit description. And if there is Reviewed-by commentary which is actively wrong, I may start sending patch submitters form letters informing them that they should feel free to ignore reviews from Reviewer XXXXX since the reviews may be unreliable. So I wouldn't focus on review numbers, but review *quality*. Cheers, - Ted