Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] MAINTAINERS: add polarfire rng, pci and clock drivers

From: <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>
To: <sboyd@kernel.org>, <arnd@arndb.de>, <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>,
	<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
	<kw@linux.com>, <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	<mturquette@baylibre.com>, <robh@kernel.org>,
	<herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	<Daire.McNamara@microchip.com>, <Cyril.Jean@microchip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] MAINTAINERS: add polarfire rng, pci and clock drivers
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2022 22:53:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bb401ee9-2c8e-d486-9663-b80ae9cc0974@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220609224347.1212EC34115@smtp.kernel.org>

On 09/06/2022 23:43, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Palmer Dabbelt (2022-06-01 18:55:40)
>> On Mon, 23 May 2022 13:00:01 PDT (-0700), Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2022 20:52, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 23 May 2022 04:42:53 PDT (-0700), Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
>>>>> On 05/05/2022 11:55, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>>>>> Hardware random, PCI and clock drivers for the PolarFire SoC have been
>>>>>> upstreamed but are not covered by the MAINTAINERS entry, so add them.
>>>>>> Daire is the author of the clock & PCI drivers, so add him as a
>>>>>> maintainer in place of Lewis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey Palmer,
>>>>> I know youre busy etc but just a reminder :)
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I didn't realize this was aimed at the RISC-V tree.�� I'm fine
>>>> taking it, but it seems like these should have gone in along with the
>>>> drivers.
>>>
>>> Yeah, sorry. In hindsight it should've but that ship has sailed. I sent
>>> the rng bundled this way b/c I didn't want to end up a conflict.
>>> Obv. there's not a rush so I can always split it back out if needs be.
>>
>> I'm adding a bunch of subsystem maintainers just to check again.  I 
>> don't have any problem with it, just not really a RISC-V thing and don't 
>> wan to make a mess.  I've stashed it over at palmer/pcsoc-maintainers 
>> for now.
>>
> 
> Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
> 

+CC Herbert for the last one.

This is likely to generate a conflict in -next though b/c
my spi driver that was applied for 5.20 also touches this
entry. It really pisses me off that I allowed this to
happen & become a burden..

What am I "meant" to do here? Do the merges myself & provide
the conflict resolution? Or for something as obvious as this
is it enough to notify that there will be one?

Sorry,
Conor.