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

[Randy Dunlap]

On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 06:09:52 +0100 Mark Brown wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 04:53:33PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> 
> > But do as you like.  Which parts of SubmittingPatches do you think
> > support your interpretation?
> 
> > and should we have this line:
> > 	Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:.
> > changed to:
> > 	Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by: or Reviewed-by:.
> > e.g.?
> 
> Current practice seems to be that Acked-by is used instead of
> Reviewed-by - the latter is comparatively rare.


ISTM that more education and encouragement are needed about Reviewed-by:.
(Patch Review is a possible kernel summit topic.)

and that SubmittingPatches should be updated since we generally refer people
to that file and not to Documentation/development-process/


Samples from my partial mailing list archives:

linux-pci mailing list:		Acked-by: 93	Reviewed-by: 81
linux-mm mailing list:		Acked-by: 2104	Reviewed-by: 1344
netdev mailing list:		Acked-by: 1366	Reviewed-by: 659

---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
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/