On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 12:38:38PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 03:32:23AM +0000, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
> >
> >> Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > [...]
> >> > >
> >> > > @@ -1373,6 +1373,7 @@ static void rtw89_ops_unassign_vif_chanctx(struct ieee80211_hw
> >> > > *hw,
> >> > >
> >> > > rtwvif_link = rtwvif->links[link_conf->link_id];
> >> > > if (unlikely(!rtwvif_link)) {
> >> > > + mutex_unlock(&rtwdev->mutex);
> >> > > rtw89_err(rtwdev,
> >> > > "%s: rtwvif link (link_id %u) is not active\n",
> >> > > __func__, link_conf->link_id);
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Acked-by: Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >
> >>
> >> Thanks for the ack.
> >>
> >> Acked-by is often used by the maintainer, so I will change it to Reviewed-by
> >> during committing.
> >
> > To me Acked by just means you're okay with the patch. When I use it, it means I
> > don't feel qualified or interested enough to do a full review. For example, if
> > I complain about a v1 patch and they fix my issue in v2 then I like to say that
> > I'm okay with it. In that case I'll use Reviewed-by for a full review or Acked
> > by if the bits that I care about are okay. I don't like to complain and then
> > just go silent.
> >
> > In the end, it doesn't make any difference. You'll get CC'd on bug reports to
> > do with the patch and you'll potentially feel bad for not spotting the bug, I
> > guess.
>
> I have understood that Acked-by should be only used by the corresponding
> maintainers and the documentation seems to say the same:
>
> https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html#when-to-use-acked-by-cc-and-co-developed-by
"If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a patch
but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can ask to have
an Acked-by: line added to the patch’s changelog."
The documentation does say that it's also often used by maintainers for
approving part of a patchset. But to me, it's the "partial" which is the more
important word in that sentence. I haven't reviewed the whole patch.
>
> The reason I ask non-maintainers avoid using Acked-by is that it messes
> our patchwork listings (it counts both Acked-by and Reviewed-by tags).
>
> --
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
Huh. I wasn't aware that anything really differentiated between Acks and
Reviews. That does make things more complicated.
I rarely do Acks, but when I do it's because I'm outside of a subsystem I'm
familiar with. I would say LGTM and leave it at that, except other people want
proper tags. Probably they won't insist on proper tags from me though so it's
fine.
regards,
dan carpenter
