Re: [patch 1/6] Linux Kernel Markers - Architecture Independent Code

[Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>]

On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 16:04:29 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote:

> > On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 16:00:01 -0700 Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:07:34 -0400 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > 
> > > Changelog:
> > > - markers_mutex now nests inside module_mutex rather than the opposite.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
> > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> > > Reviewed-by: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Documentation/SubmittingPatches recognizes Signed-off-by: and
> > Acked-by:.  Nothing about Reviewed-by.  Quote:
> > 
> >   Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:.  It is a record that the acker
> >   has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: carries no such connotation or indication IMO.
> > Please use Acked-by if that's what these reviewers have done.
> 
> Yeah.  We will start introducing Reviewed-by: (I haven't yet quite worked
> out how yet) but it will be a quite formal thing and it would be something
> which the reviewer explicitly provided.  For now, let's please stick with
> acked-by (if those individuals did indeed send an acked-by)
> -

Thanks.  I look forward to the explanation of Reviewed-by, what it
means, and how it differs from Acked-by.


---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***