[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211116181837.GA24696@csail.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:18:37 -0800
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa@...il.mit.edu>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, jgross@...e.com,
x86@...nel.org, pv-drivers@...are.com,
Alexey Makhalov <amakhalov@...are.com>,
Deep Shah <sdeep@...are.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, keerthanak@...are.com,
srivatsab@...are.com, anishs@...are.com, vithampi@...are.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, namit@...are.com, kuba@...nel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] MAINTAINERS: Update maintainers for paravirt ops
and VMware hypervisor interface
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 08:33:40PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-11-15 at 14:39 -0800, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 12:16:53PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > Maybe we should just remove MAINTAINERS from stable trees to make it
> > > obvious.
> >
> > I don't think we should go quite that far. Instead, perhaps we can
> > modify get_maintainer.pl (if needed) such that it prints out a warning
> > or reminder to consult the upstream MAINTAINERS file if the script is
> > invoked on an older stable kernel.
>
> I don't see how that's feasible.
>
Not that I'm pushing for this change, but isn't it straight-forward to
distinguish upstream and stable kernel releases based on their
versioning schemes? The SUBLEVEL in the Makefile is always 0 for
upstream, and positive for stable versions (ignoring ancient kernels
like v2.6.32, of course). Since stable kernels are behind mainline by
definition, anytime the get_maintainer.pl script is invoked on a
kernel with a positive SUBLEVEL value, we can print out the said
warning/reminder (if it is considered useful).
Regards,
Srivatsa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists