From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6422EDE5 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:53:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Jan 2017 05:53:15 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,284,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="926490131" Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.3]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Jan 2017 05:53:13 -0800 Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.230]) by IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.173]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:53:13 +0000 From: "Van Haaren, Harry" To: "dev@dpdk.org" CC: Thomas Monjalon , "Yigit, Ferruh" , Igor Ryzhov , Steve Shin Thread-Topic: Understanding of Acked-By Thread-Index: AdJ3DSgm1AEdeGBtQJuh0EF8q0Uy0w== Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:53:12 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiYWMzMmE1YjMtZDE2OS00MDNiLTgxZDEtZmQ0MmFjYzI1NmY3IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE1LjkuNi42IiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6InZyNWt6bWNpTGNTRStIQkFua1VXYjl0ZExyVFZQSHhsVFdmMURSUUNTNW89In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [dpdk-dev] Understanding of Acked-By X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:53:17 -0000 ( Was [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] ethdev: fix MAC address replay, CC-ed are parti= cipants of that thread http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-January/056278.= html ) Hi All, There was an idea (from Thomas) to better document the Acked-by and Reviewe= d-By in the above thread, which I think is worth doing to make the process = clearer. I'll kick off a thread*, and offer to submit a patch for the docum= entation when a consensus is reached. The question that needs to be addressed is "What is the most powerful signo= ff to add as somebody who checked a patch?" The documentation mentions Acked, Reviewed, and Tested by[1], as signoffs t= hat can be commented on patches. The Review Process[2] section mentions Rev= iewed and Tested by, but nowhere specifically states what any of these indi= cate. Offered below is my current understanding of the Acked-by; Reviewed-by; and= Tested-by tags, in order of least-powerful first: 3) Tested-by: (least powerful) - Indicates having passed testing of functionality, and works as expected= for Tester - Does NOT include full code review (instead use Reviewed by) - Does NOT indicate that the Tester understands architecture (instead use= Acked by) 2) Reviewed-by: - Indicates having passed code-review, checkpatch and compilation testing= by Reviewer - Does NOT include full testing of functionality (instead use Tested-by) - Does NOT indicate that the Reviewer understands architecture (instead u= se Acked by) 1) Acked-by: (most powerful) - Indicates Reviewed-by, but also: - Acker understands impact to architecture (if any) and agrees with chan= ges - Acker has performed runtime sanity check - Requests "please merge" to maintainer - Level of trust in Acked-by based on previous contributions to DPDK/net= working community The above is a suggested interpretation, alternative interpretations welcom= ed. -Harry [1] http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/patches.html#commit-messages-bo= dy [2] http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/patches.html#the-review-process * Apologies for the slightly bike-shed topic