Re: [Xen-devel] [v7][PATCH 00/16] Fix RMRR

["Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@xxxxxxxxx>]

> > > > It looks like most of the libxl/libxc patches have been acked.  It
> > > > seems to me that most of the hypervisor patches (1-3, 14-15) are
> > > > either ready to go in or pretty close.
> > > Now that I looked over v8 I have to admit that if I was a tools
> > > maintainer I wouldn't want to see some of the tools patches in
> > > with just an ack, but without any review.
> > I'm somewhat confused at this point.
> >
> > Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that
> > maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch. It is a
> > record that the acker has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated
> > acceptance.
> >
> > Does this imply this is already reviewed?
> No, that would be expressed by Reviewed-by. Acked-by merely
> means no objection by the maintainer for the change to go in.
Sorry I'm trying to dig into this.

If nobody would like to take a look at this, so isn't this the 
associated maintainer's responsibility to review finally? In this case 
isn't Acked-by fine enough?
Or you still want to us add two lines explicitly,

Reviewed-by: A
Acked-by: A


Thanks
Tiejun

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel