Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: rectify entry for RISC-V/MICROCHIP POLARFIRE SOC SUPPORT

[<Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>]

On 11/08/2022 08:32, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 9:14 AM <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/08/2022 08:05, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>> Commit 3cbd67384677 ("MAINTAINERS: add the Polarfire SoC's i2c driver")
>>> adds the file entry for drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-microchip-core.c, but the
>>> file is actually named drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-microchip-corei2c.c.
>>>
>>> Repair this file reference in RISC-V/MICROCHIP POLARFIRE SOC SUPPORT.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> Conor, please ack.
>>
>> FFS... Silly mistake from me there, keep getting caught out by
>> the maintainers entries when I do an inter-version rename.
>> Is there something I can add to my build scripts, other than the
>> get_maintainer selftest to catch these?
>> Thanks Lukas.
>>
> 
> I am not aware of another script. Why do you see the need for another one?
> 
> I acknowledge that ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=patterns
> does take a few seconds (roughly 30 or so) and it checks the whole
> MAINTAINERS file. Is that just not performant enough?


Yeah, it takes longer than my kernel build does! If there was something
faster I'd have added it to run every time I do a build so it'd be
impossible to miss.

It's fine, I'll just add it as a arg ;)

> 
> I usually have a set of patches in a local branch (all those patches
> were sent out, but are pending somewhere) to get to zero warnings from
> this script. In the last few years, I did get to some points in time
> that ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=patterns reported zero
> warnings on linux-next, but then new issues were introduced and the
> hunt continued. When we are back at that point of zero warnings, I
> will ask the intel 0-day testing team to include the '
> ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=patterns' check into their
> patch testing efforts, and hopefully that reduces the chance of
> picking a patch with such an issue and we can keep it almost always at
> zero warnings (wishful thinking on my side).

Yeah, would be nice for catching eejits like me :)
Thanks!

> 
> Lukas
> 
>> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>>
>>>
>>> Arnd, please pick this minor non-urgent clean-up patch.
>>>
>>>    MAINTAINERS | 2 +-
>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>>> index 9203efedea1e..797fde7e1821 100644
>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>>> @@ -17544,7 +17544,7 @@ F:      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/microchip,mpfs-musb.yaml
>>>    F:     arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/
>>>    F:     drivers/char/hw_random/mpfs-rng.c
>>>    F:     drivers/clk/microchip/clk-mpfs.c
>>> -F:     drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-microchip-core.c
>>> +F:     drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-microchip-corei2c.c
>>>    F:     drivers/mailbox/mailbox-mpfs.c
>>>    F:     drivers/pci/controller/pcie-microchip-host.c
>>>    F:     drivers/rtc/rtc-mpfs.c
>>> --
>>> 2.17.1
>>>
>>