On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 9:26 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:31 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 6:02 AM Nick Desaulniers > > <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Added to kbuild documentation. Provides more official info on building > > > kernels with Clang and LLVM than our wiki. > > > > > > Suggested-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Changes V1 -> V2: > > > * s/On going/ongoing/ > > > * add Randy's Suggested-by > > > > > > I do not understand this tag update. > > > > As far as I saw the review process, > > I do not think Randy deserves to have Suggested-by > > because he just pointed out a typo (on going -> ongoing) : > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11401189/#23179575 > > > > (or, was there off-line activity I had missed?) > > > > Hi Masahiro, > > I got some credits from Nick for a review by seeing a typo - not on a > review of the code - and H. Peter Anvin asked why. > > I am not sure what is here the correct credit to give. > Depends a "Reviewed-by" and/or "Suggested-by" on a technical review? Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst 13) Using Reported-by:, Tested-by:, Reviewed-by:, Suggested-by: and Fixes: is a helpful guideline. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
