Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] Documentation: RISC-V: Mention the UEFI Standards

["Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>]

Am Mittwoch, 7. Dezember 2022, 03:08:14 CET schrieb Palmer Dabbelt:
> The current patch acceptance policy requires that specifications are
> approved by the RISC-V foundation, but we rely on external
> specifications as well.  This explicitly calls out the UEFI
> specifications that we're starting to depend on.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> Reviewed-by: Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
> Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
> index 16b90a31d267..02e6a48809ef 100644
> --- a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
> @@ -20,9 +20,11 @@ Submit Checklist Addendum
>  -------------------------
>  We'll only accept patches for new modules or extensions if the
>  specifications for those modules or extensions are listed as being
> -"Frozen" or "Ratified" by the RISC-V Foundation.  (Developers may, of
> -course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees that contain code for
> -any draft extensions that they wish.)
> +unlikely to be incompatibly changed in the future.  For
> +specifications from the RISC-V foundation this means "Frozen" or
> +"Ratified", for the UEFI forum specifications this means a published
> +ECR.  (Developers may, of course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees
> +that contain code for any draft extensions that they wish.)

Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@vrull.eu>



_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv