From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
Jacek Danecki <jacek.danecki@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/12] libata, libsas: introduce sched_eh and end_eh port ops
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:49:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABE8wwsmuRqzW7yiR=jWriEnxsH+koxSooQ18cqDP2ver54mCg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335219777.2749.11.camel@dabdike.lan>
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 3:22 PM, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
>> No, it means:
>>
>> "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."
>
> Isn't that tested-by or reviewed-by?
Quoting from Documentation/SubmittingPatches was just a tongue in
cheek way of pointing out that you have a local/narrower
interpretation of Acked-by, and that Jacek's Acked-by is consistent
with what's documented.
[..]
> We're just struggling to understand why it's there. If it's read and
> approved the patch, then reviewed-by is the more appropriate. If it's
> actually booted and ran through a set of unit/QA tests, then it should
> be tested-by.
>
Ok, reviewed-by is what we'll aim to do for Intel-internal "acks" for
isci / libsas going forward.
--
Dan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-23 22:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-13 23:36 [GIT PATCH 00/12] libsas fixes for 3.4 Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:36 ` [PATCH 01/12] libsas: introduce sas_work to fix sas_drain_work vs sas_queue_work Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 02/12] libsas: cleanup spurious calls to scsi_schedule_eh Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 03/12] libata, libsas: introduce sched_eh and end_eh port ops Dan Williams
2012-04-21 6:19 ` Jeff Garzik
2012-04-22 17:30 ` James Bottomley
2012-04-23 2:33 ` Jeff Garzik
2012-04-23 8:10 ` James Bottomley
2012-04-23 19:13 ` Dan Williams
2012-04-23 22:22 ` James Bottomley
2012-04-23 22:49 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2012-04-24 10:11 ` Jacek Danecki
2012-04-23 19:41 ` Dan Williams
2012-04-26 17:21 ` Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 04/12] libsas: fix sas_find_bcast_phy() in the presence of 'vacant' phys Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 05/12] libsas: fix sas_get_port_device regression Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 06/12] libsas: unify domain_device sas_rphy lifetimes Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 07/12] libsas: fix ata_eh clobbering ex_phys via smp_ata_check_ready Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 08/12] libata: make ata_print_id atomic Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 09/12] libsas, libata: fix start of life for a sas ata_port Dan Williams
2012-04-21 6:20 ` Jeff Garzik
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 10/12] scsi: fix eh wakeup (scsi_schedule_eh vs scsi_restart_operations) Dan Williams
2012-04-21 12:22 ` James Bottomley
2012-04-22 15:24 ` Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 11/12] libsas: fix false positive 'device attached' conditions Dan Williams
2012-04-22 10:53 ` James Bottomley
2012-04-22 15:56 ` Dan Williams
2012-04-13 23:37 ` [PATCH 12/12] scsi_transport_sas: fix delete vs scan race Dan Williams
2012-04-22 10:38 ` James Bottomley
2012-04-22 15:43 ` Dan Williams
2012-04-22 17:15 ` James Bottomley
2012-05-05 21:52 ` Dan Williams
2012-05-20 19:20 ` Dan Williams
2012-04-14 8:19 ` [GIT PATCH 00/12] libsas fixes for 3.4 jack_wang
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='CABE8wwsmuRqzW7yiR=jWriEnxsH+koxSooQ18cqDP2ver54mCg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=jacek.danecki@intel.com \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.