From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: davem@davemloft.net
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com,
andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, horms@kernel.org,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
corbet@lwn.net, skhan@linuxfoundation.org,
workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: improve wording of reviewer guidance
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2026 10:53:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260406175334.3153451-1-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
Reword the reviewer guidance based on behavior we see on the list.
Steer folks:
- towards sending tags
- away from process issues.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
---
CC: corbet@lwn.net
CC: skhan@linuxfoundation.org
CC: workflows@vger.kernel.org
CC: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
---
Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 8 +++++---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
index 3aa13bc2405d..bda93b459a05 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
@@ -551,10 +551,12 @@ helpful tips please see :ref:`development_advancedtopics_reviews`.
It's safe to assume that netdev maintainers know the community and the level
of expertise of the reviewers. The reviewers should not be concerned about
-their comments impeding or derailing the patch flow.
+their comments impeding or derailing the patch flow. A Reviewed-by tag
+is understood to mean "I have reviewed this code to the best of my ability"
+rather than "I can attest this code is correct".
-Less experienced reviewers are highly encouraged to do more in-depth
-review of submissions and not focus exclusively on trivial or subjective
+Reviewers are highly encouraged to do more in-depth review of submissions
+and not focus exclusively on process issues, trivial or subjective
matters like code formatting, tags etc.
Testimonials / feedback
--
2.53.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-04-06 17:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-06 17:53 Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-04-06 18:09 ` [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: improve wording of reviewer guidance Joe Damato
2026-04-06 18:37 ` Nicolai Buchwitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260406175334.3153451-1-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox