Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mfd: Use full path to other schemas

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 5/3/24 09:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/05/2024 10:24, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, 03 May 2024, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/05/2024 10:08, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/3/24 08:21, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>  .../bindings/mfd/samsung,s2mpa01.yaml         |  2 +-
>>>>>  .../bindings/mfd/samsung,s2mps11.yaml         | 12 ++---
>>>>>  .../bindings/mfd/samsung,s5m8767.yaml         |  4 +-
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> So this should be Ack. You cannot review part of the patch ("I have
>>> carried out a technical review of this patch...").
>>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.8-rc5/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>>
>> Reviewed-by is totally appropriate here.
> 
> Submitting patches is clear on that:
> "A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the patch is an"
> Not "the patch or part of patch"
> 
> And ack:
> " It is a record that the acker has at least reviewed the patch ....
> Acked-by: does not necessarily indicate acknowledgement of the entire
> patch."
> 
> So no, reviewing part of the patch means you Ack it. Especially that in
> git log the Rb tag will suggest entire patch was reviewed, while it was
> not true. Review of 80% of patch did not happen.

Thanks, Krzysztof, I'll keep in mind next time. I now confirm I went
through all the substitutions and they look good to me. R-b now applies
to all the changes.

ta




[Index of Archives]     [Linux SoC Development]     [Linux Rockchip Development]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]    
  • [Linux on Unisoc (RDA Micro) SoCs]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite News]

  •   Powered by Linux