Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org> writes: > Hi, > > On 14/3/25 19:39, Pierrick Bouvier wrote: >> On 3/14/25 11:34, Anthony PERARD wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 10:33:08AM -0700, Pierrick Bouvier wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> one patch is missing review: >>>> [PATCH v5 12/17] hw/xen: add stubs for various functions. >>> >>> My "Acked-by" wasn't enough? Feel free try change it to "Reviewed-by" >>> instead. >>> >> Those are differents. From what I understand, Reviewed implies Acked, but >> the opposite is not true. If it was, they would be equivalent. >> Thanks. > > IIUC on QEMU Acked-by means "as a maintainer of files modified by > this patch, I don't have objection on my area, as long as someone > else takes the patch". It doesn't mean the patch has been reviewed. > > Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst has some advice, but not much. Kernel docs are more thorough, and I believe the information there applies to QEMU reasonably well: https://docs.kernel.org/process/5.Posting.html#patch-formatting-and-changelogs
