From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=95.215.58.116 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793869069; b=R5cKCjNYRyuwa/fuiq+gRXzrXFliEnpybyFrw5G9hbPcfPOJ5lEySEp8wruhkAvQJ1Oe MyQT+HQTFMeMDwaKGn1+v1ks0CnupL0lXCZG0ZuIVEmIJHu8ke9RCvFnq2XT9l3Q5FxmL vjdXHG/hfT4F8uG6trVrP/GwXiA79+uJig3HDI5bMOXFBpiME1bKlAXgpNF0Ts7ktKTTC HdiBzrwuRlpxyNcQNw99oJoNzwI3uYQ5Tyzm5acyV8h+C/oM/G+GK7WUBs8oX1tqs4HSc vKeVRtWpgZ7uZphdhiy9pOg0W0AF41JIA8pHbmdQ/rMJ0CMPvnqR3xdiTp0YPnyWRiQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793869069; h=DMARC-Filter:X-Envelope-To:DKIM-Signature:X-Envelope-To:Received: X-Mizu-Trace-ID:X-Migadu-Flow:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; bh=0J35juf+Q3wPkqJ/fEvR/SIaQikfoEpWGs87Fk8Zd4I=; b=nmf3XUUYnVLz9HjhT+ir5NJRudHgEkwO0m0t0pr0EFit0yxKzzoM7o5VIXiA8x0KR9IB 9Y46K3Qi1b+bwAq1632By4FfK0/RcuVwG4D2Vx4UFsejy26tQW29dDpWRnTNpCDiFaL91 FxqqvJyCgEX1RfEfxwyfUABtzKMaguEb1N8AgQuefBNAVt/pymnZw+jto+qhNGinDBe88 pRy2ARIHuAPThlfIedCuYTEy2KY4uHgebWlxl0rxUdongqgbc4uaH+7SgWdz8POnHUm9y fRJ+huCpbWcTTxbuq+1JbaGtMcB4zL60VUgQN0GSeaSBwx17rWOtRQkYboxfFRj4X1w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=wyuan.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wyuan.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=95.215.58.116 Received: from mta1.migadu.com (out-116.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.116]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C801A606A326 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2026 08:57:42 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org C801A606A326 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=wyuan.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wyuan.org X-Envelope-To: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=cl508koB5a8RnOsym5lLE/Q8Iyz8NnCi/Q9gPQjRJbE=; c=simple/simple; d=wyuan.org; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1793869060; v=1; x=1794473860; b=jHpwiRQzQDFrOwTh+1KvLJo3LtHjwUXyPRM5LDgEyz9K7ZMRv5kUImDPOniaaXr5uRBxkFlm IxBeyzJbzZRVu9ymLOLqqfe7N58LvcDV7+VL5wVuXt+y3m+jQDVUdqq/d1DIgTf5fFH9mEOuJVf /LltGVInpNfNijQLiScRYwbGhWCogMcZEnBmUan20DUxkz4pLoE9nLpf8Jmz92WtAolaQsyBRGu KpcCi+l7xVCFA8M84SAA5e/zRlHYxgXKLQ1driTBsNrMkWMIQmDf2OSah0TMMX8XiJLvC5A65ko 8S4MzQMhIFfRujCOnJmOffofQbycv9frS548t/BUeBhuA== X-Envelope-To: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id c9cd18ad5c886574; Thu, 05 Nov 2026 08:57:40 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: c9cd18ad5c886574 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2026 16:57:33 +0800 From: Weijie Yuan To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Randy Dunlap , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: submitting-patches: Clarify half-baked review tags Message-ID: References: <20261104171744.439209-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com> <70a3eccf-2f4c-4816-a3d7-cd0a6708b5a9@oss.qualcomm.com> X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <70a3eccf-2f4c-4816-a3d7-cd0a6708b5a9@oss.qualcomm.com> Krzysztof Kozlowski writes: > On 05/11/2026 09:34, Weijie Yuan wrote: > > Krzysztof Kozlowski writes: > > > >> Refactoring of driver subsystems or some core driver parts often come > >> with change of the actual drivers. If that happens within one patch, > >> people giving "Reviewed-by" tag only to piece of the patch, like one > >> driver, and ignoring entire rest including the main concept of the > >> patch, are not really reviewing "the patch". > >> > >> As explained in Submitting Patches document, the "Reviewer's statement > >> of oversight" is for patch: > >> > >> (a) I have carried out a technical review of this patch to > >> evaluate its appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into > >> the mainline kernel. > >> > >> The sentence is complete, meaning it does not allow implicit variations > >> "this patch or part of this patch". > > > > Agreed. > > > >> Reviewing pieces of patch while ignoring the main part of it, is > >> much closer to Acknowledgment, thus Ack, and "Reviewed-by" credit should > >> not be applicable. > > > > But in this case, I suspect that your "Acked-by" trailer will still be > > interpreted as an ack of the entire patch in future git logs, rather > > than a partial ack and/or a partial review. > > > > Which would be fine, Acked-by has that meaning and no one really counts > Acks or tracks Acks for any metrics or patch quality purposes. ;-) Also makes sense. (I just posted my last one and found that v2 was also posted, what a coincidence.) Thanks!