On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Jani Nikula jani.nikula@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2018, Lucas Stach dev@lynxeye.de wrote:
My _feeling_ is that the review economy in drm-misc, which gets DRM the bragging rights of 80% reviewed patches, has already lowered the weight associated with those reviews, as most of them are really shallow. This might be okay with you and I'm certainly not trying to change the way drm-misc is handled, but I doubt that this is the universal gold standard which should be applied to everything.
I think you need to substantiate your claims about rubber stamping reviews. I'm not seeing that. And I do pay attention to the reviews that happen on i915 and drm display parts, kind of review-of-review. I'm personally pretty diligent about review, and I'm honestly *more* ashamed of patches I reviewed regressing than patches I wrote. Looking around, I don't think I'm alone.
Yeah, a thing to keep in mind is that we've had this "forced review" in drm-intel since well over 5 years (so much longer than commit rights). And the same rules apply to any core drm patches that get merged into drm-misc. Similar for amd drivers, and Dave Airlie as subsystem maintainer. Small drivers are explictly excempt from strict review requirements in drm-misc, there we just want an Acked-by: to signal a 2nd person at least looked at the patch. But even there a lot of the patches got through full review scrutinies, with a bunch of revisions until the patch is right. And all this has defacto run on a "you review mine, I review yours" review economy all this time.
That amounts to 50+ people, some who've done this for 5+ years, you accused of doing rubber stamp reviews. I agree with Jani that this deserves some more concrete data than your personal feelings. -Daniel