linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] staging: Convert to using %pOFn instead of device

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]

Date:   Thu, 13 Sep 2018 16:26:53 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ian Arkver <ian.arkver.dev@...il.com>,
        Steve Longerbeam <slongerbeam@...il.com>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: Convert to using %pOFn instead of device_node.name

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 3:45 PM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2018-09-12 at 15:26 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> > A problem with MAINTAINERS is there is no way to tell who applies
> > patches for a given path vs. anyone else listed.
>
> try the --scm option

That kind of helps if the maintainer has listed a tree, but gives
wrong results if not. And you still have to figure out who owns which
tree. That's not hard, but it's not scriptable.

IMO, we should reserve 'M:' for maintainers with trees and use 'R:'
driver maintainers. That's redefining M as "maintainer" rather than
"mail patches to". You could still have both for a entry so you can
know who to go bug when your patch hasn't been applied.

Rob