linux-kernel - Re: Rule for bridge yaml dt binding maintainers?

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: <CAL_JsqJXa8QxQmLfkCO8_SSsgYm2nTFW1J6wx4bGbZgAy8Sxog@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Apr 2020 15:02:43 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To:     Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:     Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@...labora.com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        Collabora Kernel ML <kernel@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: Rule for bridge yaml dt binding maintainers?

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 12:59 PM Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Adrian
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 02:19:24PM +0300, Adrian Ratiu wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I got confused while doing the txt -> yaml conversion at [1] and it's still
> > not clear to me who should be added in the "maintainers" field.  Clearly not
> > the maintainers as returned by get_maintainer.pl. :)
> >
> > Rob mentioned that "owners" should be manintainers but I also have trouble
> > picking the persons who should be owners / yaml maintainers.
> >
> > Looking at the completed bridge conversions in the latest linux-next, I
> > couldn't find a rule and the majority of bindings are still txt:
> >
> > $ find ./devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/ -name *txt | wc -l
> > 23
> > $ find ./devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/ -name *yaml | wc -l
> > 5
> >
> > So my questions are:
> > 1. Is there a general rule for assigning yaml file owners/maintainers?
> >
> > 2. Is this vagueness specific to the bridge dt bindings only?
> >
> > 3. Who should step up and maintain these bindings? Original/new authors,
> > SoC, bridge, DRM maintainers etc.?
> >
> > It would be useful to have a rule to make it easier to do these conversions.
> > We (Collabora) are considering doing the conversion work.
>
> For the panel conversion I did recently it was simple:
> 1) If listed in MAINTAINERS - use this info
> 2) Otherwise use the person(s) that authored the original .txt file.
>    Using git log --follow foo.txt
> 3) In a few cases I may have decided otherwise, but the above covers the
>    majority.

Yes.

> I would also be great if you or someone else could:
> - teach get_maintainers about .yaml file listed maintainers

It already does to some extent. IIRC, there's a mode to extract email
addresses from files.

I was hoping that the MAINTAINERS file split happens sometime and we
can just generate a MAINTAINERS file for bindings.

> - teach checkpatch that it is OK to convert .txt to .yaml

Yeah, I should fix my bug.

> - teach checkpatch about some simple yaml validation (maybe)

I don't see checkpatch being able to check much of what comes up in
review. Maybe indentation.

> I am looking forward to the day we have more .yaml files
> than .txt files in Documentation/devicetree/binding/*

700 vs. 3000 currently. It's about 60-70 new bindings and ~100
conversions per cycle. At this point we're review limited I think and
at the current rate, we should be done in 7 years. Yay! :( We need a
faster way.

Rob