lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Avoid Wunused-but-set warning
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 06:09:52 +0100 Mark Brown wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 04:53:33PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
> > But do as you like. Which parts of SubmittingPatches do you think
> > support your interpretation?
>
> > and should we have this line:
> > Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:.
> > changed to:
> > Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by: or Reviewed-by:.
> > e.g.?
>
> Current practice seems to be that Acked-by is used instead of
> Reviewed-by - the latter is comparatively rare.


ISTM that more education and encouragement are needed about Reviewed-by:.
(Patch Review is a possible kernel summit topic.)

and that SubmittingPatches should be updated since we generally refer people
to that file and not to Documentation/development-process/


Samples from my partial mailing list archives:

linux-pci mailing list: Acked-by: 93 Reviewed-by: 81
linux-mm mailing list: Acked-by: 2104 Reviewed-by: 1344
netdev mailing list: Acked-by: 1366 Reviewed-by: 659

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-07-11 19:13    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans