From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, Igor Ryzhov <iryzhov@nfware.com>
Cc: Steve Shin <jonshin@cisco.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] ethdev: fix MAC address replay
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:25:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1679033.GODGAxT5Vg@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5cd19f6a-311c-b0fe-5d6c-ee757ac2e86e@intel.com>
2017-01-24 13:21, Ferruh Yigit:
> On 1/24/2017 10:09 AM, Igor Ryzhov wrote:
> > Thank you Steve.
> >
>
> > I never did it before and I don't know if I have rights for that, but:
> >
> > Acked-by: Igor Ryzhov <iryzhov@nfware.com <mailto:iryzhov@nfware.com>>
>
> Unrelated to the patch itself, but since it has been mentioned, let me
> share what I know, I believe Thomas or others will correct me if I am wrong:
>
> - Everyone can Ack.
> And this is useful information for maintainers, so it is something
> good when more people review and ack. Please do.
>
> - Multiple ack or review is better.
>
> - But each Ack does not have same weight, maintainer decides on this
> weight, based on contribution of the person who ack'ed.
>
> - There is slight difference between Acked-by and Reviewed-by:
>
> -- Acked-by: Kind of asking for patch to be applied, saying this patch
> is good and please get it.
>
> -- Reviewed-by: Saying I have done the review at my best and patch looks
> good to me.
>
> Acked-by has slightly more responsibility than Reviewed-by.
>
> If you are not maintainer of that field, and not have strong opinion
> about that patch to be merged, it is possible to prefer Reviewed-by
> against Acked-by.
>
> But overall both are good, and definitely better than not saying
> anything at all.
We should definitely better document these tags.
My view is that Reviewed-by is stronger because it says you really checked
the patch.
Acked-by means you agree with the intent and you trust the author.
Any of these tags will be stronger if it is delivered by a maintainer.
As conclusion, here you should stress you took the review job with a
Reviewed-by tag.
A maintainer is more inclined to use the Acked-by tag, even if he does
a review.
As the maintainer of ethdev, I thank you to take the review job so I won't
have to wonder which kind of regression could be in the patch.
I will just check the intent and will rely on your Reviewed-by.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-25 10:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-19 18:47 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] lib/librte_ether: error handling on " Steve Shin
2017-01-19 19:35 ` Steve Shin (jonshin)
2017-01-19 22:39 ` Igor Ryzhov
2017-01-20 2:30 ` Steve Shin (jonshin)
2017-01-20 12:17 ` Igor Ryzhov
2017-01-20 19:12 ` Steve Shin (jonshin)
2017-01-20 22:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ethdev: fix " Steve Shin
2017-01-23 8:50 ` Igor Ryzhov
2017-01-23 23:19 ` Steve Shin (jonshin)
2017-01-23 23:50 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Steve Shin
2017-01-24 2:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] " Steve Shin
2017-01-24 10:09 ` Igor Ryzhov
2017-01-24 13:21 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-24 14:00 ` Igor Ryzhov
2017-01-25 10:25 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2017-01-27 17:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] " Steve Shin
2017-01-30 9:21 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1679033.GODGAxT5Vg@xps13 \
--to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=iryzhov@nfware.com \
--cc=jonshin@cisco.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).