lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Oct]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 3/3] MAINTAINERS: Add KX022A maintainer entry
From
Date
On Mon, 2022-10-24 at 07:24 +0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> On 10/24/22 09:52, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-10-21 at 14:23 +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > > Add maintainer entry for ROHM/Kionix KX022A accelerometer sensor driver.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > > index cf0f18502372..3ab9c5f97dfe 100644
> > > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > > @@ -11435,6 +11435,11 @@ F: drivers/mfd/khadas-mcu.c
> > > F: include/linux/mfd/khadas-mcu.h
> > > F: drivers/thermal/khadas_mcu_fan.c
> > >
> > > +KIONIX/ROHM KX022A ACCELEROMETER
> > > +R: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
> > > +S: Supported
> > > +F: drivers/iio/accel/kionix-kx022a*
> >
> > How is this "S: Supported" without an M: maintainer?
>
> I am currently paid to work with the Kionix/ROHM upstream drivers. Hence
> I add 'S:' to ones I am looking after.
>
> The ideology why I have 'R' and not 'M' is summarized by my earlier patch:
>
> >> I can also add myself as a maintainer instead of a reviewer if it better
> >> suits iio maintainer. I however don't plan setting up my own public
> >> repository and hope the further patches will be merged via IIO tree.
> >>
> >> So, as Geert once explained to me - In that case the difference between
> >> me as a maintainer vs. a reviewer would be only really relevant to the
> >> subsystem (in this case IIO) maintainer. The subsystem maintainer who
> >> merges patches is allowed to take in changes acked by downstream
> >> maintainer w/o obligation to do thorough review. (Downstream
> maintainer is
> >> to be blamed if things explode :]). If ack is given by a reviewer, then
> >> the subsystem maintainer has the full responsibility and should always
> >> do the review. Or - this is how I remember our discussion went - feel
> >> free to correct me if I am wrong :] In any case - please let me know if
> >> you'd rather see M: not R: in front of my name for the kx022a.
>
> This seemed to be fine with Jonathan:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/87ac9a5e-b5ba-82f3-c00c-75d5e6f01597@gmail.com/
>
> I've also written a longer version of this in an LinkedIn article:
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/should-you-linux-kernel-maintainer-matti-vaittinen/
>
> (I enjoy writing small stories. So doing an occasional small LinkedIn
> articles on working with the upstream is kind of an hobby for me.)
>
> Anyways, I don't see a contradiction with 'S + R' compared to 'S + M'.
> Well, please educate me if I am wrong :]

The subsystem is one thing, someone outside of KIONIX/ROHM may be
supporting the subsystem. If this _particular_ driver is "supported"
there should be an individual listed as its actual maintainer, not
just a person that might review submitted patches.

S: *Status*, one of the following:
Supported: Someone is actually paid to look after this.
Maintained: Someone actually looks after it.

"this" is this particular driver, not any subsystem "above" it.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-10-24 12:42    [W:0.076 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site