Re: [PATCH] Avoid Wunused-but-set warning

[Jesper Juhl]

On Sun, 10 Jul 2011, Randy Dunlap wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 12:49:20 -0400 Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Raghavendra D Prabhu
> > >>> <rprabhu@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>> Hi,
> > >>>>    I am seeing Wunused-but-set warning while make nconfig.  Looks like
> > >>>>    active_menu is not used. Removing it fixes the warning.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Raghavendra D Prabhu <rprabhu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>
> > >>> Acked-by: WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>
> > >> Out of curiosity, what is your status to ACK such patch ?
> > >
> > > What kind of status do you need to ACK such a simple patch?
> > >
> > As per Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> > 
> > <<
> > 13) When to use Acked-by: and Cc:
> > The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the
> > development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.
> > 
> > If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a
> > patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can
> > arrange to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog.
> > 
> > Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that
> > maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch.
> > >>
> > 
> > That said, it is not a strong requirement... unfortunately. So, let's
> > have some fun and go ACK thousand of trivial patch just to generate
> > traffic on the LKML and give myself self-importance :-)
> 
> Acked-by: is mostly used as a weak version of Reviewed-by:
> and the "definition" in SubmittingPatches is not accurate IMO.
> I.e., it can be used by anyone.
> 

Interesting. I was under the impression that Reviewed-by: was a weaker 
thing than Acked-by: - I certainly have been using it as such.

I've always interpreted Acked-by: as being something you could apply if 
you were the author, maintainer or other person with similar strong 
background knowledge of the code. Where Reviewed-by: could be used by 
anyone, as long as they had taken the time to read the patch and try and 
understand what was going on and the result/conclusion looked good.

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>       http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.