Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: phy: realtek: add PHY driver for RTL8127ATF

From: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2026 10:57:40 -0800

On Sat, 10 Jan 2026 18:23:06 +0100 Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> On 1/9/2026 2:28 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 21:27:06 +0100 Heiner Kallweit wrote:  
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/include/linux/realtek_phy.h  
> > 
> > How would you feel about putting this in include/net ?
> > Easy to miss things in linux/, harder to grep, not to
> > mention that some of our automation (patchwork etc) has
> > its own delegation rules, not using MAINTAINERS.  
> 
> Just sent a v2 with the new header moved to new include/net/phy/.
> patchwork is showing a warning rgd a missing new MAINTAINERS entry.
> However this new entry is added with the patch:
> 
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -9416,6 +9416,7 @@ F:	include/linux/phy_link_topology.h
>  F:	include/linux/phylib_stubs.h
>  F:	include/linux/platform_data/mdio-bcm-unimac.h
>  F:	include/linux/platform_data/mdio-gpio.h
> +F:	include/net/phy/
>  F:	include/trace/events/mdio.h
>  F:	include/uapi/linux/mdio.h
>  F:	include/uapi/linux/mii.h
> 
> Bug in the check?

My reading of it was basically that it's upset that realtek PHYs don't
have a dedicated maintainer. The check considers the PHY subsystem as
too large for the same people to cover core and all the drivers.
If that's the case then the check is working as expected.
It's just flagging the sub-optimal situation to the maintainers.

I wasn't sure if you'd be willing to create a dedicated MAINTAINERS
entry for Realtek PHYs. The check itself is safe to ignore in this case.