linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] MAINTAINERS: Add KX022A maintainer entry

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e72efbf7a80cae08041e4ff7be8630044c989c92.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Oct 2022 04:08:42 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
        Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        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>,
        Dmitry Rokosov <DDRokosov@...rdevices.ru>,
        Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@...entembedded.com>,
        Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@...il.com>,
        Jagath Jog J <jagathjog1996@...il.com>,
        "linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] MAINTAINERS: Add KX022A maintainer entry

On Mon, 2022-10-24 at 10:56 +0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> On 10/24/22 13:40, Joe Perches wrote:
[]
> > 
> > 	S: *Status*, one of the following:
> > 	   Supported:	Someone is actually paid to look after this. > 	   Maintained:	Someone actually looks after it.
> > 
> > "this" is this particular driver, not any subsystem "above" it.
> 
> Yes. And as I wrote, I am paid to look after this driver as well as 
> other drivers I've submitted upstream for ROHM components (Kionix being 
> part of ROHM these days). I have used this Supported + Reviewer 
> combination for all other IC drivers as well. This is why, by 
> definition, the S eg. supported is correct. Question is whether one 
> supporting a driver must be a maintainer? If this is the case, then I'd 
> better review all of my MAINTAINER entries. However, I (still) don't see 
> the problem of having a reviewer supporting the IC.

Please do not conflate a "reviewer", someone that "might" look at
a patch and offer comments, and a "supporter", someone that actively
supports the driver/subsystem.  I don't have a tree that is pulled
yet I am the get_maintainer and checkpatch maintainer.