Re: [PATCH 10/10] slab: Fix MAINTAINERS entry

Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
2025-06-09T16:42:41Z

On Mon, 9 Jun 2025, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:

> Informally, as discussed at LSF/MM, the broad perception is that a
> maintainer MUST be actively involved, whereas a reviewer has expertise and
> MAY optionally get involved in the process.

Both Andrew and I are actively involved in various ways but we have other
priorities as well. If there would be an issue with maintainership then we
would address the issue.

> I base this on the fact that Christoph has made 2 patches (other than
> updating email) since 2020 and David hasn't contributed patches since 2016
> (please forgive me if I missed anything, this was a _rough_ git log check).

The two patches were in 2024 and there was one in 2020.... The last
large scale change I did to slab was in 2015. If you look at Andrew's
changes its a similar thing.

> Whereas Vlastimil has essentially handled _all_ slab maintainership duties
> for a very long time.

Yes he is doing a great job and has done so for a long time. That is one
reason why we can spend more time with other things and limit ourselves to
mostly commenting here and there.

> According to the maintainer handbook [0]:
>
> "That said, being a maintainer is an active role. The MAINTAINERS
> file is not a list of credits (in fact a separate CREDITS file
> exists), it is a list of those who will actively help with the
> code. If the author does not have the time, interest or ability to
> maintain the code, a different maintainer must be selected."

Well both Andrew and I fit that role as maintainers.