[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230720-mace-dipped-3bd066667b3f@spud>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 23:23:46 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: corbet@....net, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>, workflows@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux@...mhuis.info, kvalo@...nel.org,
benjamin.poirier@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH docs v3] docs: maintainer: document expectations of small
time maintainers
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 02:37:46PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 16:15:26 +0100 Conor Dooley wrote:
> > ..I noticed that none of these sections address actually testing the
> > code they're responsible for on a (semi-)regular basis. Sure, that comes
> > as part of reviewing the patches for their code, but changes to other
> > subsystems that a driver/feature maintainer probably would not have been
> > CCed on may cause problems for the code they maintain.
> > If we are adding a doc about best-practice for maintainers, I think we
> > should be encouraging people to test regularly.
> I think our testing story is too shaky to make that a requirement.
> Differently put - I was never able to get good upstream testing running
> when I worked for a vendor myself so I wouldn't know how to draw
> the lines.
I'm not saying it needs to be added as a must level item, some words to the
effect of
Maintainers should test the drivers/features they are responsible for on a
regular basis, independent of patches that modify their area of
responsibility. This helps ensure that changes to other parts of the kernel
do not introduce regressions in their driver/feature."
would suffice IMO.
The doc as it is is a useful addition though, so you can add a
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
if you like.
Thanks,
Conor.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists