Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
To:     Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>
Cc:     Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@gmail.com>,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        saurav.girepunje@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: core: remove condition with no effect
Date:   Sun, 22 Aug 2021 18:24:21 +0200
Message-ID: <18734228.Nv2I6EOGHm@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <CAA=Fs0mu4m04_Be4-f=W+=_hhGn5oJ2q=KOmZdRrMyGhMgqc-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <YSFgrLUfXzgcT6k4@user> <1821445.fzUCeO1EU3@localhost.localdomain> <CAA=Fs0mu4m04_Be4-f=W+=_hhGn5oJ2q=KOmZdRrMyGhMgqc-Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Sunday, August 22, 2021 4:58:10 PM CEST Phillip Potter wrote:
> Dear Fabio,
> 
> An Acked-by merely signals acknowledgement of the patch, and that is
> looks OK to the person offering the tag. Please see the following
> quote from the kernel.org documentation:
> "Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:. It is a record that the
> acker has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance."
> It is not, to my knowledge, a commitment from the reviewer that the
> patch applies to the given tree at that precise moment in time.

Dear Philip,

I didn't mean to be harsh with you, I apologize if this is the message 
I conveyed. Really!

> I reviewed the patch, and indicated my acceptance - the content of the
> patch is fine. Whilst I will often make an effort to merge + build
> test many patches, I will not do this with all of them, I simply don't
> have the time due to other commitments. You can be assured that if I
> have offered this tag I have at least read the patch and it looks
> correct to me.

Now it is clearer to me what acking means. I've given only a handful of
acks because I thought I should also check if they applied and if they
build. It takes time. Now I understand it is not required. Thanks.
 
> Particularly with a driver as in flux as this one, there are going to
> be many merge conflicts. Advice such as this to me is not particularly
> helpful, as I can promise you I'm trying :-)

Please, don't ever think I'm not more than sure that you give a lot
of your _unpaid_ time to the kernel and I thank you very much
I know what it means, because I too have other commitments :-)

Cheers,

Fabio 

> Regards,
> Phil
>