| Message ID | 20240924130831.38861-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Documentation/process: maintainer-soc: clarify submitting patches | expand |
On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 03:08:31PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Most of these submaintainers have their own trees where they stage patches, > sending pull requests to the main SoC tree. These trees are usually, but not > -always, listed in MAINTAINERS. The main SoC maintainers can be reached via the > -alias soc@kernel.org if there is no platform-specific maintainer, or if they > -are unresponsive. > +always, listed in MAINTAINERS. I probably had some specific case in mind with that original wording. I presume it still holds true for some smaller platforms, but I cannot remember the specific case that prompted it. I'll have to see if I can figure out which platforms they are (if any) and get the tree added. Cheers, Conor. > What the SoC tree is not, however, is a location for architecture-specific code > changes. Each architecture has its own maintainers that are responsible for > architectural details, CPU errata and the like. > > +Submitting Patches for Given SoC > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > + > +All usual platform related patches should be sent via SoC submaintainers > +(platform-specific maintainers. This includes also changes to per-platform or ^ this is unclosed. > +shared defconfigs (scripts/get_maintainer.pl might not provide correct > +addresses in such case).
On 24/09/2024 15:19, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 03:08:31PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> Most of these submaintainers have their own trees where they stage patches, >> sending pull requests to the main SoC tree. These trees are usually, but not >> -always, listed in MAINTAINERS. The main SoC maintainers can be reached via the >> -alias soc@kernel.org if there is no platform-specific maintainer, or if they >> -are unresponsive. >> +always, listed in MAINTAINERS. > > I probably had some specific case in mind with that original wording. I > presume it still holds true for some smaller platforms, but I cannot > remember the specific case that prompted it. I'll have to see if I can > figure out which platforms they are (if any) and get the tree added. > > Cheers, > Conor. > >> What the SoC tree is not, however, is a location for architecture-specific code >> changes. Each architecture has its own maintainers that are responsible for >> architectural details, CPU errata and the like. >> >> +Submitting Patches for Given SoC >> +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> + >> +All usual platform related patches should be sent via SoC submaintainers >> +(platform-specific maintainers. This includes also changes to per-platform or > ^ this is unclosed. Ack. I have v2 with minor text changes in other places as well. I will send soon. Best regards, Krzysztof
diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst index 12637530d68f..dc0136e8d852 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst @@ -30,10 +30,13 @@ tree as a dedicated branch covering multiple subsystems. The main SoC tree is housed on git.kernel.org: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/soc/soc.git/ +Maintainers +----------- + Clearly this is quite a wide range of topics, which no one person, or even small group of people are capable of maintaining. Instead, the SoC subsystem -is comprised of many submaintainers, each taking care of individual platforms -and driver subdirectories. +is comprised of many submaintainers (platform maintainers), each taking care of +individual platforms and driver subdirectories. In this regard, "platform" usually refers to a series of SoCs from a given vendor, for example, Nvidia's series of Tegra SoCs. Many submaintainers operate on a vendor level, responsible for multiple product lines. For several reasons, @@ -43,14 +46,43 @@ MAINTAINERS file. Most of these submaintainers have their own trees where they stage patches, sending pull requests to the main SoC tree. These trees are usually, but not -always, listed in MAINTAINERS. The main SoC maintainers can be reached via the -alias soc@kernel.org if there is no platform-specific maintainer, or if they -are unresponsive. +always, listed in MAINTAINERS. What the SoC tree is not, however, is a location for architecture-specific code changes. Each architecture has its own maintainers that are responsible for architectural details, CPU errata and the like. +Submitting Patches for Given SoC +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +All usual platform related patches should be sent via SoC submaintainers +(platform-specific maintainers. This includes also changes to per-platform or +shared defconfigs (scripts/get_maintainer.pl might not provide correct +addresses in such case). + +Submitting Patches to the Main SoC Maintainers +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +The main SoC maintainers can be reached via the alias soc@kernel.org only in +following cases: + +1. There are no platform-specific maintainers. + +2. Platform-specific maintainers are unresponsive. + +3. Introducing a completely new SoC platform after community review. Such new + SoC work should be sent first to common mailing lists, pointed out by + scripts/get_maintainer.pl, for community review. After positive community + review, work should be sent in one patchset containing new arch/foo/Kconfig + entry, DTS files, MAINTAINERS file entry and optionally initial drivers with + their Devicetree bindings. The MAINTAINERS file entry should list new + platform-specific maintainers, who are going to be responsible for handling + patches for the platform from now on. + +Note that the soc@kernel.org is not a place to discuss the patches, thus work +sent to this address should be already considered as acceptable by the +community. + Information for (new) Submaintainers ------------------------------------
Patches for SoCs are expected to be picked up by SoC submaintainers. The main SoC maintainers should be addressed only in few cases. Rewrite the section about maintainer handling to document above expectation. Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> Cc: Heiko Stübner <heiko@sntech.de> --- During our LPC ad-hoc BoF, we discussed improving Maintainer SoC docs and I think I volunteered to write something. The trouble is that whatever I won't write in my notes, escapes my memory. I believe this is what we discussed. Was there anything more to write/document? --- Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)