On 6.4.2026 19:53, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
Reword the reviewer guidance based on behavior we see on the list.
Steer folks:
- towards sending tags
- away from process issues.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
---
CC: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]
---
Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 8 +++++---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
index 3aa13bc2405d..bda93b459a05 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
@@ -551,10 +551,12 @@ helpful tips please see
:ref:`development_advancedtopics_reviews`.
It's safe to assume that netdev maintainers know the community and the
level
of expertise of the reviewers. The reviewers should not be concerned
about
-their comments impeding or derailing the patch flow.
+their comments impeding or derailing the patch flow. A Reviewed-by tag
+is understood to mean "I have reviewed this code to the best of my
ability"
+rather than "I can attest this code is correct".
I had the same hesitation when starting to review on netdev, unsure if
my R-b
carried any value. Therefore I appreciate the addition.
-Less experienced reviewers are highly encouraged to do more in-depth
-review of submissions and not focus exclusively on trivial or
subjective
+Reviewers are highly encouraged to do more in-depth review of
submissions
+and not focus exclusively on process issues, trivial or subjective
matters like code formatting, tags etc.
Testimonials / feedback
Reviewed-by: Nicolai Buchwitz <[email protected]>
