Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add some unowned files to the SBSA-REF section

[Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>]

On 29/09/2023 18.12, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 16:19:18 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> These files belong to the sbsa-ref machine and thus should
>> be listed here.
> 
> First of all, thanks for this.
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   MAINTAINERS | 3 +++
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>> index 874234cb7b..fc415d3cea 100644
>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>> @@ -954,6 +954,9 @@ R: Marcin Juszkiewicz <marcin.juszkiewicz@linaro.org>
>>   L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org
>>   S: Maintained
>>   F: hw/arm/sbsa-ref.c
>> +F: hw/misc/sbsa_ec.c
> 
> Yes, pure oversight, sorry about that.
> 
>> +F: hw/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c
>> +F: include/hw/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.h
> 
> I just want to clarify that this is not "the watchdog for the SBSA
> platform", but "the watchdog defined by Arm's SBSA specification"
> (and belatedly the BSA specification)" - the specification that
> sbsa-ref (intends to) provide a compliant platform implementation for.

Thanks for the clarification!

> Another such component is the "generic UART", but since that is a
> subset of pl011 there is no real value in providing a dedicated model
> of it.
> 
> Which I guess is a long-winded way of saying: this component does not
> necessarily want/need the same maintainers as the sbsa-ref platform.
> I'm still happy to maintain it, and it may make sense to keep it under
> this header for now.

I think as long as the sbsa-ref machine is the only one in our git tree that 
uses this device, it's fine if we add the sbsa watchdog to this section 
here. If there will ever be another machine that uses this device, we can 
still reconsider and create a dedicated section for it in the MAINTAINERS 
file if necessary.

> (In which case
> Reviewed-by: Leif Lindholm <quic_llindhol@quicinc.com>
> )

  Thanks!
   Thomas