From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: add maintainer entry Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:06:23 +0200 Message-ID: <5178D5EF.9090102@linaro.org> References: <1366810463-17495-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <51781B48.30208@gmail.com> <5178D0EF.3090004@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]:39059 "EHLO mail-wi0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750758Ab3DYHG1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Apr 2013 03:06:27 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id hm14so2956750wib.17 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 00:06:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Rob Herring , rjw@sisk.pl, andrew@lunn.ch, khilman@deeprootsystems.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org, nicolas.ferre@atmel.com, paulus@samba.org, josephl@nvidia.com, kgene.kim@samsung.com, swarren@wwwdotorg.org, magnus.damm@gmail.com, plagnioj@jcrosoft.com, lenb@kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, jason@lakedaemon.net, arnd@arndb.de, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, nsekhar@ti.com, rob.herring@calxeda.com, horms@verge.net.au, ben-linux@fluff.org, horms+renesas@verge.net.au, linux@maxim.org.za, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kernel@pengutronix.de On 04/25/2013 08:49 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 25 April 2013 12:15, Daniel Lezcano wr= ote: >> On 04/24/2013 07:50 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >=20 >>> Shouldn't MAINTAINERS contain the driver maintainers too? >> >> It should contains the upstream maintainer for the subsystem, and >> optionally a co-maintainer. >> >> The MAINTAINERS file gives informations about the patch submission p= ath. >> >> The file's header should contain the maintainer of the driver, so th= e >> submitted patches will go to the subsystem maintainer for upstreamin= g >> and to the driver maintainer for acked-by. >> >> If you add an entry in MAINTAINERS like: >> >> ARM/CALXEDA HIGHBANK ARCHITECTURE >> M: Rob Herring >> L: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subs= cribers) >> S: Maintained >> F: arch/arm/mach-highbank/ >> +F: drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-calxeda.c >> >> That will add confusion while we are trying to clarify the situation >> with a single entry point for the patches submission. If someone wan= ts >> to submit a patch for this driver, it will look at the MAINTAINERS f= ile >> and won't know if it should send the patch against arm-soc or linux-= pm. >=20 > I though otherwise. We can add entry in MAINTAINERS for any module. > Module can be a framework/architecture or a single driver. IMO, there are too much drivers for that. It is simpler for someone to read the MAINTAINERS file to find the cpuidle drivers goes through linux-pm. I think we can trust Rafael to ask for the acked-by from the maintainer of the driver before taking the patches. > Adding entry for cpuidle driver of a architecture as you wrote for ca= lxeda is > wrong as it adds to confusion and so there should be a separate entry= for > this driver rather than merging it with arch/ entries. Yes, actually it was an example to show the confusion we could be facin= g. Thanks -- Daniel --=20 Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for= ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog