linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/4] ARM: SoC: add a new platform, UniPhier (arch/arm/mach-uniphier)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2230140.n6kW8LSSaP@wuerfel>
Date:	Wed, 13 May 2015 09:48:33 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:	arm@...nel.org, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/4] ARM: SoC: add a new platform, UniPhier (arch/arm/mach-uniphier)

On Wednesday 13 May 2015 16:00:21 Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> 2015-05-13 0:00 GMT+09:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
> > On Friday 08 May 2015 13:07:10 Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > Welcome as our latest new maintainer. In the future, please send
> > any follow-up patches for the architecture specific code to
> > arm@...nel.org in addition to the normal recipients, once you
> > consider them ready to be applied.
> 
> 
> Please teach me a little more because I am not experienced enough
> in this community.
> 
> 
> I checked MAINTAINERS, but I could not find arm@...nel.org.
> Is it documented somewhere?
> 
> I found ARM SUB-ARCHITECTURES entry in that file, but it does not mention
> the responsible individuals.
> (I assume, you and Olof are the ones.)
>

We normally only take patches from subarch maintainers that know who
we are and how it works, but we don't want to be Cc'd on every single
patch, so we don't have an entry in MAINTAINERS directly.

> I have one more question.
> 
> Are you receiving pull requests from each sub-arch maintainer?
> Or should every patch be submitted to arm@...nel.org and
> applied by you (or other ARM-SoC maintainers)?
> 
> I have not earned enough reputations in this ML, so I know
> it is too early for me to handle pull-reqs.
> 
> I understand the general development process of Linux, but
> the maintainership of the ARM-SoC subsystem looks more hierarchized, so
> I just want to know its development process correctly.

No worries, if you are unsure you can always ask us on the mailing
list or on the #armlinux channel on irc.freenode.net.

If you have more than a few patches at once, we'd always appreciate
a pull request, for a couple of patches, emails to arm@...nel.org plus
linux-arm-kernel are fine as well.

When you do pull requests, please split them up according to larger
topics, e.g. send dts changes separately from code changes, and
separate bug fixes, cleanups and new feature support.

Often when you add a new driver, that will require sending the driver
code to a subsystem maintainer, and the dts changes to us. If everything
goes well, your DT bindings are both forward and backward compatible,
so they can get merged independently. If you ever have interdependencies
between them, talk to us first so we can find a solution.

For sending pull requests, it would be good to have a gpg key that
is signed by other well-known kernel developers. If you have such
a key, you can also request a kernel.org account to host a git tree
there, or you can host a git tree somewhere on your company's domain.
A public hosting service like github is not as good for us, but we
can deal with it when you are still ramping up your infrastructure.
Let me know if you need help finding kernel developers to sign your key.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/