On 5/16/26 7:39 AM, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote:
> On 5/16/26 14:38, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Common understanding of word "Reviewer" is: a person performing a review
>> work [1]. Tools are not persons, thus cannot be reviewers in this term.
>> Also tools cannot make statements ("A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of
>> opinion"), since making a statement needs some sort of conscious mind.
>>
>> Our docs already clearly mark that "Reviewed-by" must come from a
>> person:
>>
>> - "By offering my Reviewed-by: tag, I state that:"
>>
>> Usage of first person "I" and word "state"
>>
>> - "A Reviewed-by tag is *a statement of opinion* that the patch is an
>> appropriate modification of the kernel without any remaining serious"
>>
>> Only a person can make a statement of opinion.
>>
>> - "Any interested reviewer (who has done the work) can offer a
>> Reviewed-by"
>>
>> A person can offer a tag thus above does not grant the tool
>> permission to offer a tag.
>>
>> However this is not enough and apparently English is not that precise,
>> so let's clarify that only a person can state the "Reviewer's statement
>> of oversight".
>>
>> Link: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reviewer [1]
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
>> Cc: David Hildenbrand <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
>
> I agree with the intent that the tag is for people (whether they use a tool
> or not to help them). We also don't put "Tested-by: kernel test robot" or
> syzkaller on every commit that they test and find no bugs. Review is also
> not just about absence of bugs, but agreeing with the larger design and
> whether the change makes sense to do in the first place.
Ack that also.
> So whether that's achieved with this particular wording or differently,
>
> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
Thanks.
>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> I find it silly to need to describe English, but it seems it is needed.
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>> ---
>> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 8 ++++----
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>> b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>> index d7290e208e72..a989de43f3db 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>> @@ -581,10 +581,10 @@ By offering my Reviewed-by: tag, I state that:
>>
>> A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the patch is an
>> appropriate modification of the kernel without any remaining serious
>> -technical issues. Any interested reviewer (who has done the work) can
>> -offer a Reviewed-by tag for a patch. This tag serves to give credit to
>> -reviewers and to inform maintainers of the degree of review which has been
>> -done on the patch. Reviewed-by: tags, when supplied by reviewers known to
>> +technical issues. Any interested reviewer (who has done the work and is a
>> +person) can offer a Reviewed-by tag for a patch. This tag serves to give
>> +credit to reviewers and to inform maintainers of the degree of review which
>> has
>> +been done on the patch. Reviewed-by: tags, when supplied by reviewers
>> known to
>> understand the subject area and to perform thorough reviews, will normally
>> increase the likelihood of your patch getting into the kernel.
>>
>
>
--
~Randy
