Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: stmmac: thead: clean up clock rate setting

["Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>]

On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 01:34:36AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-02-24 at 09:09 +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 06:33:44AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2025-02-23 at 11:40 +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > > > Adding Joe Perches.
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 02:15:17PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > > []
> > > > I've been investigating why the NIPA bot complains about maintainers
> > > > not being Cc'd, such as for patch 1 of this series:
> > > > 
> > > > https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/static/nipa/936447/13985595/cc_maintainers/stdout
> > > 
> > > Additional maintainers added or missing?
> > 
> > Let me be clear - NIPA is not something under my control. It is a bot
> > run by Jakub on netdev patches that are received by patchwork - so
> > patches that have been emailed out, and thus contain at least the
> > To:, Cc: and Subject: header lines, possibly all header lines that
> > have been added such as Received: etc. I don't know what it actually
> > does.
> > 
> > Now let me restate the problem, because the answer to your question
> > is in the problem description. Here's the short version:
> > 
> > 	K: entries match email headers.
> > 
> > Here's the long version:
> > 
> > If one runs get_maintainers.pl on a patch produced from git, it
> > comes out with a list of maintainers. In the case of dwmac-thead.c,
> > this includes an email address that contains "riscv".
> 
> Yeah, I got all that from your first cc, thanks.
> 
> Which is why I suggested that the nipa bot use
> get_maintainer.pl's --nokeywords option somewhere.

That's no solution. K: exists so that maintainers get Cc'd on patches
that match keywords - for example a subsystem maintainer wants to be
Cc'd on patches that make use of the subsystem interfaces would include
a K: line to pick up on function names that appear in patches.

Disabling K: means that these will be missed.

NIPA has caught several instances where I should have been Cc'd but
haven't because of this facility, and thus patches have not been
properly reviewed. So, disabling K: is detrimental.

IMHO, it's crazy that keywords match any of the email headers present
in a patch that is presented to it. As I've already said - either
get_maintainers should restrict to a limited number of headers used
for matching, or NIPA needs to present to get_maintainers what would
be an original patch as generated by git without lots of email headers.

> I don't use/control/read/write/care_about the nipa bot either.

Sigh. Why is this so damn difficult. I wasn't expecting you to do
anything about it immediately. It's something that _you_ /and/
_Jakub_ as the author of NIPA need to come to some agreement on.
That's why my original email was also sent _to_ Jakub as well.

Sheesh. Again, why is this so difficult????

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!