Re: [PATCH phy-next 22/22] MAINTAINERS: add regex for linux-phy

[Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>]

On Thu, Mar 05, 2026 at 10:11:32AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 3/5/26 9:51 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > Hello Konrad,
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 05, 2026 at 09:39:35AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> >>> index 55af015174a5..bdfa47d9c774 100644
> >>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> >>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> >>> @@ -10713,6 +10713,7 @@ F:    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/
> >>>  F:   drivers/phy/
> >>>  F:   include/dt-bindings/phy/
> >>>  F:   include/linux/phy/
> >>> +K:   \b(devm_)?(of_)?phy_(create|destroy|init|exit|reset|power_(on|off)|configure|validate|calibrate|(get|set)_(mode|media|speed|bus_width|drvdata)|get_max_link_rate|pm_runtime_(get|put)|notify_(connect|disconnect|state)|get|put|optional_get|provider_(un)?register|simple_xlate|(create|remove)_lookup)\b|(struct\s+)?phy(_ops|_attrs|_lookup|_provider)?\b|linux/phy/phy\.h|phy-props\.h|phy-provider\.h
> >>
> >> Would looking for the devm/of_phy_ prefix followed by an open parentheses
> >> not suffice for the 'has function call' case, instead of listing all
> >> currently present exported functions?
> >
> > This would maybe work when you run ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl on a file.
> > But I would like it to have good coverage on individual patches too. And
> > since the devm/of_phy prefix only matches when you "get" the PHY, not
> > "use" it, my fear is we would still be missing out on the most important
> > part of the patches.
> 
> But that's just '(devm_)?(of_)?phy_[a-z]+\(|includes.h'?

Yeah, but what about the networking PHY API, phy_start(), phy_connect(),
phy_inband_caps() etc?