From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation•org>
To: Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@gmail•com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel•org>,
corbet@lwn•net, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn•ch>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel•org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel•org>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia•com>,
workflows@vger•kernel.org, linux-doc@vger•kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org, netdev@vger•kernel.org,
linux@leemhuis•info, kvalo@kernel•org,
benjamin.poirier@gmail•com
Subject: Re: [PATCH docs v3] docs: maintainer: document expectations of small time maintainers
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 20:26:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2023072012-subzero-maturity-b6cd@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50164116-9d12-698d-f552-96b52c718749@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 07:23:56PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
> On 19/07/2023 19:32, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > We appear to have a gap in our process docs. We go into detail
> > on how to contribute code to the kernel, and how to be a subsystem
> > maintainer. I can't find any docs directed towards the thousands
> > of small scale maintainers, like folks maintaining a single driver
> > or a single network protocol.
> >
> > Document our expectations and best practices. I'm hoping this doc
> > will be particularly useful to set expectations with HW vendors.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn•ch>
> > Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation•org>
> > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel•org>
> > Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel•org>
> > Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia•com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel•org>
> > ---
>
> Thanks for writing this. One question—
>
> > +Reviews
> > +-------
> > +
> > +Maintainers must review *all* patches touching exclusively their drivers,
> > +no matter how trivial. If the patch is a tree wide change and modifies
> > +multiple drivers - whether to provide a review is left to the maintainer.
>
> Does this apply even to "checkpatch cleanup patch spam", where other patches
> sprayed from the same source (perhaps against other drivers) have already
> been nacked as worthless churn? I've generally been assuming I can ignore
> those, do I need to make sure to explicitly respond with typically a repeat
> of what's already been said elsewhere?
No, you can ignore them if you don't want to take them :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-20 18:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-19 18:32 [PATCH docs v3] docs: maintainer: document expectations of small time maintainers Jakub Kicinski
2023-07-20 15:15 ` Conor Dooley
2023-07-20 21:37 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-07-20 22:23 ` Conor Dooley
2023-07-20 18:23 ` Edward Cree
2023-07-20 18:26 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2023-07-20 18:31 ` Mark Brown
2023-07-20 21:42 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-07-21 7:46 ` Martin Habets
2023-07-21 8:38 ` Simon Horman
2023-07-21 19:53 ` Jonathan Corbet
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=2023072012-subzero-maturity-b6cd@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation$(echo .)org \
--cc=andrew@lunn$(echo .)ch \
--cc=benjamin.poirier@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=broonie@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=corbet@lwn$(echo .)net \
--cc=ecree.xilinx@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=krzk@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=kuba@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=kvalo@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=leonro@nvidia$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux@leemhuis$(echo .)info \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=workflows@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox