From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8CA0200BA9 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 10:56:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738580210; cv=none; b=i7wJKwgEMjtmV1wgbADO+B6d9c0MY7Iog03GoZ3iCGLNBOUWRGipEULDndWCNmHcjiU6qgKjWzPvjpY8laV3s3vWSbi/G/ujmM0TOkfr/BNoIIWxdi8vNRIYGbHbZrzJxcBDE2tv56NEkLX7kgEfC0OnN8qBD24qpK3Q+UN8MnY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738580210; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9FFOFGTLILoN+cAudwTBk0us7mw/9A3hYbv0QeN7jHM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=k200nsNyjBAtT2j1dsvy680OatQqfs3TOCRvFwRNXNhgMqgXm0HSrzdeXacDxEtS1UA4k/L+lzz32gIE2wSUGBQync7uykV54u5fZMycnFt7RYtHBtseWoA6Aqdn4w4GqYY5fXSaOs5iV+1Z914CopgVue/I2IPhm+CSIe6y8OM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=n0e5b9Kk; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="n0e5b9Kk" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 10C01C4CED2; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 10:56:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1738580210; bh=9FFOFGTLILoN+cAudwTBk0us7mw/9A3hYbv0QeN7jHM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=n0e5b9KkkxAKFQo6E8fbxyZbKFTa5cGu259X+ISooYCPFo/Im3Drelbc70aXMHtkw MYRmLaIv/0eLIzzIJ5pkuMRkltalSQty8AqV7H4syXPr1FRodkSE31vV9vsbY0lTy1 h1El5B9bDfMcU1+D4NR7rV7FxTYvfz18IPqknXX5MDrbyJ5gtqI+y/mx5r/X0wAKAO LPJ9R20XJdp1ji2NHTHWXZB5vFNNZURpeR/6vcn+/5gMKN3BGtIkcqy9Nf3R9FQ2e5 zeh3iGu5aEipggDPN72pEGrKLmVyJpaRApxU8Gr7pirN7WBfBVV4znja6SxK7G+xCn Du86L2nIe+fXg== Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 10:56:47 +0000 From: Simon Horman To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] MAINTAINERS: add a sample ethtool section entry Message-ID: <20250203105647.GG234677@kernel.org> References: <20250202021155.1019222-1-kuba@kernel.org> <20250202021155.1019222-2-kuba@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250202021155.1019222-2-kuba@kernel.org> On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 06:11:55PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > I feel like we don't do a good enough keeping authors of driver > APIs around. The ethtool code base was very nicely compartmentalized > by Michal. Establish a precedent of creating MAINTAINERS entries > for "sections" of the ethtool API. Use Andrew and cable test as > a sample entry. The entry should ideally cover 3 elements: > a core file, test(s), and keywords. The last one is important > because we intend the entries to cover core code *and* reviews > of drivers implementing given API! > > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski > --- > This patch is a nop from process perspective, since Andrew already > is a maintainer and reviews all this code. Let's focus on discussing > merits of the "section entries" in abstract? In the first instance this seems like a good direction to go in to me. My only slight concern is that we might see an explosion in entries. Do we think so? Do we mind if that happens?