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:   Mon, 10 Oct 2022 12:31:00 +0300
From:   Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jagath Jog J <jagathjog1996@...il.com>,
        Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@...entembedded.com>,
        Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@...il.com>,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 5/5] MAINTAINERS: Add KX022A maintainer entry

On 10/9/22 15:38, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2022 17:38:34 +0300
> Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com> wrote:
> 
>> Add maintainer entry for ROHM/Kionix KX022A accelerometer senor driver.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
>>
>> ---
>> I can also add myself as a maintainer instead of a reviewer if it better
>> suits iio maintainer. I however don't plan setting up my own public
>> repository and hope the further patches will be merged via IIO tree.
>>
>> So, as Geert once explained to me - In that case the difference between
>> me as a maintainer vs. a reviewer would be only really relevant to the
>> subsystem (in this case IIO) maintainer. The subsystem maintainer who
>> merges patches is allowed to take in changes acked by downstream
>> maintainer w/o obligation to do thorough review. (Downstream maintainer is
>> to be blamed if things explode :]). If ack is given by a reviewer, then
>> the subsystem maintainer has the full responsibility and should always
>> do the review. Or - this is how I remember our discussion went - feel
>> free to correct me if I am wrong :] In any case - please let me know if
>> you'd rather see M: not R: in front of my name for the kx022a.
> 
> 
> Entirely up to you.  I tend to take a look at all IIO patches but will
> take a less detailed look if there is a tag from someone I've built
> up trust with - doesn't matter if they are a maintainer of a particular
> driver or not. I only ever look at MAINTAINERS when sending out patches,
> never when reviewing except to perhaps moan that someone wasn't cc'd
> who should have been!

In that case I'll keep the R as I have done with the other corners I've 
touched.

Yours
	-- Matti

-- 
Matti Vaittinen
Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors
Oulu Finland

~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ