linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: rectify entry for RISC-V/MICROCHIP POLARFIRE SOC SUPPORT

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: <CAKXUXMzaR_503UMXmoRe4CvUuek50VJb+33R6xYf3Op4tw78ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 Aug 2022 09:32:18 +0200
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To:     Conor Dooley <Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com>
Cc:     Daire.McNamara@...rochip.com, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: rectify entry for RISC-V/MICROCHIP POLARFIRE
 SOC SUPPORT

On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 9:14 AM <Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/08/2022 08:05, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> >
> > Commit 3cbd67384677 ("MAINTAINERS: add the Polarfire SoC's i2c driver")
> > adds the file entry for drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-microchip-core.c, but the
> > file is actually named drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-microchip-corei2c.c.
> >
> > Repair this file reference in RISC-V/MICROCHIP POLARFIRE SOC SUPPORT.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
> > ---
> > Conor, please ack.
>
> FFS... Silly mistake from me there, keep getting caught out by
> the maintainers entries when I do an inter-version rename.
> Is there something I can add to my build scripts, other than the
> get_maintainer selftest to catch these?
> Thanks Lukas.
>

I am not aware of another script. Why do you see the need for another one?

I acknowledge that ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=patterns
does take a few seconds (roughly 30 or so) and it checks the whole
MAINTAINERS file. Is that just not performant enough?

I usually have a set of patches in a local branch (all those patches
were sent out, but are pending somewhere) to get to zero warnings from
this script. In the last few years, I did get to some points in time
that ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=patterns reported zero
warnings on linux-next, but then new issues were introduced and the
hunt continued. When we are back at that point of zero warnings, I
will ask the intel 0-day testing team to include the '
./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=patterns' check into their
patch testing efforts, and hopefully that reduces the chance of
picking a patch with such an issue and we can keep it almost always at
zero warnings (wishful thinking on my side).

Lukas

> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
>
> >
> > Arnd, please pick this minor non-urgent clean-up patch.
> >
> >   MAINTAINERS | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index 9203efedea1e..797fde7e1821 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -17544,7 +17544,7 @@ F:      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/microchip,mpfs-musb.yaml
> >   F:     arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/
> >   F:     drivers/char/hw_random/mpfs-rng.c
> >   F:     drivers/clk/microchip/clk-mpfs.c
> > -F:     drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-microchip-core.c
> > +F:     drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-microchip-corei2c.c
> >   F:     drivers/mailbox/mailbox-mpfs.c
> >   F:     drivers/pci/controller/pcie-microchip-host.c
> >   F:     drivers/rtc/rtc-mpfs.c
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
>