Re: [patch 1/6] Linux Kernel Markers - Architecture Independent Code

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 01:10:54PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
> Anybody got a proposed scheme for the case where somebody like myself
> who is *not* a member of the Maintainer Cabal has looked at a patch, and
> found a valid show-stopper that's bigger than just whitespace (breaks on
> 64-bit, locking issues, etc), or other commentary that *should* be addressed
> before it gets merged?  I'd like *some* way to tag a patch with "I had an
> issue with V1, but the author addressed it to my satisfaction in V2"....
> 
> (Note that includes "the author convinced me the patch was right and I was
> wrong"...)

I think that'd be Reviewed-By.  While you are not part of the smokey room
cabal you have shown technical expertise in various areas so it seems
perfectly fine to have reviewed-by from you.  The fix vs a previous version
should probably be just in the text with a paragraph ala:

Issue blah in a previous version as found by Valdis Kletnieks has been fixed
by doing foo.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/