On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:48:06PM +0530, Shreyansh Jain wrote: > On Wednesday 25 January 2017 08:28 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2017-01-25 13:53, Van Haaren, Harry: > > > There was an idea (from Thomas) to better document the Acked-by and > > > Reviewed-By in the above thread, which I think is worth doing to make the > > > process clearer. I'll kick off a thread*, and offer to submit a patch for > > > the documentation when a consensus is reached. > > > > > > > > > The question that needs to be addressed is "What is the most powerful > > > signoff to add as somebody who checked a patch?" > > > > I do not see the benefit of knowing the most powerful. > > Anyway, the most powerful tags are done by trusted people. > > And people are trusted after delivering good reviews or patches ;) > > > > The question should be "How to use the tags?" > > > > > The documentation mentions Acked, Reviewed, and Tested by[1], as signoffs > > > that can be commented on patches. The Review Process[2] section mentions > > > Reviewed and Tested by, but nowhere specifically states what any of these > > > indicate. > > > > > > Offered below is my current understanding of the Acked-by; Reviewed-by; > > > and Tested-by tags, in order of least-powerful first: > > > > > > > > > 3) Tested-by: (least powerful) > > > - Indicates having passed testing of functionality, and works as > > > expected for Tester > > > - Does NOT include full code review (instead use Reviewed by) > > > - Does NOT indicate that the Tester understands architecture (instead > > > use Acked by) > > > > > > > > > 2) Reviewed-by: > > > - Indicates having passed code-review, checkpatch and compilation > > > testing by Reviewer > > > > Compilation testing is done by the CI. > > The reviewer must just check the results. > > > > > - Does NOT include full testing of functionality (instead use Tested-by) > > > - Does NOT indicate that the Reviewer understands architecture (instead > > > use Acked by) > > > > I disagree here. > > The reviewer must understand the impacts of the patch. > > That's why a Reviewed-by tag is really strong. > > From what I understand, 'Reviewed-by' and 'Acked-by' are the other way > around. > - Acked-by is intent that 'I agree with change'. > - Reviewed-by is 'I vouch for the changes' either through review or > testing or both. >
Other way round in what way - compared to proposed by Harry or by Thomas? Which do you view as the stronger indication that the patch is ok? Regards, /Bruce
