On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 04:04:20PM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2018-10-02 23:27:46) > > > > > > On 02/10/18 01:30, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > > > Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2018-10-01 22:53:46) > > >> Fair enough. > > >> > > >> Acked-by: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenziano@xxxxxxxxx> > > >> > > >> for the series. > > > > > > Please, read the following chapters (they're applicable for the patch > > > tag meanings in IGT, too): > > > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.18/process/submitting-patches.html#when-to-use-acked-by-cc-and-co-developed-by > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.18/process/submitting-patches.html#using-reported-by-tested-by-reviewed-by-suggested-by-and-fixes > > > > > > If we spend the time to actually review the patches, that should be > > > documented with a proper Reviewed-by and not a vague Acked-by. > > > > KMS is really an area I do not know much about. While I can say the > > patches are looking good on the IGT side, I cannot guarantee they use > > the KMS interface appropriately therefore the 'Acked-by'. After reading > > the documentation you linked I think it fits rather well since the only > > feedback I gave was on a small oversight. > > Fair enough. For future reference, you may want to comment when giving > your Acked-by, the reason for only limited review and not full R-b. Fyi I also did review this one, but an older version, and those comments didn't get addressed. So not the only thing that went slightly sideways here. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
