linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: MAINTAINERS: add status for IRQ helpers

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: <cbc4247c-323b-4f4e-8963-fcad7da9528e@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 08:17:16 +0200
From: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: MAINTAINERS: add status for IRQ helpers

Hi Krzysztof,

On 12/18/23 12:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Each maintainer entry should have a status field:
> 
>    $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=sections
>    ./MAINTAINERS:23368: warning: section without status
> 
> Fixes: d55444adedae ("MAINTAINERS: Add reviewer for regulator irq_helpers")
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
> ---
>   MAINTAINERS | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 30322190a72f..6fd22db830f5 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -23367,6 +23367,7 @@ K:	regulator_get_optional
>   
>   VOLTAGE AND CURRENT REGULATOR IRQ HELPERS
>   R:	Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
> +S:	Maintained

Isn't that a bit odd seeing the M: - entry is missing as well?

This entry falls under the drivers/regulator, and as such, is maintained 
by Mark (and the "umbrella" entry VOLTAGE AND CURRENT REGULATOR 
FRAMEWORK has all needed bits and pieces, like the M: and S:).

I think the current MAINTAINERS entries reflect the reality. Mark (and 
Liam) are THE regulator guy(s). I am just doing bits and pieces here and 
there, like reviewing the changes to these helpers.

I guess that from a technical POV duplicating the S: and M: here is a 
bit pointless, and as all duplicates, adds overhead when changes are done.

I am happy with the existing entries, but seems like everyone else is 
not. Still, having S: without M: can be a source of confusion. If S: is 
required, maybe add Mark as M: here as well. (Or if this is not Ok with 
Mark, switch my R to M - which in my opinion is still a bit pointless as 
the changes to drivers/regulator/irq_helpers.c will flow through Mark's 
hands in any case :] )

>   F:	drivers/regulator/irq_helpers.c
>   
>   VRF

Yours,
	-- Matti

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

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