[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e494422b-b989-4dc3-9828-b080dbf4c34d@samsung.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 12:29:59 +0200
From: Michal Wilczynski <m.wilczynski@...sung.com>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Uwe Kleine-König
<ukleinek@...nel.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, Andreas
Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor
Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>, Fu Wei
<wefu@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Paul Walmsley
<paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou
<aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>, Marek Szyprowski
<m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, Michael
Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Drew Fustini <fustini@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/7] Rust Abstractions for PWM subsystem with TH1520
PWM driver
On 7/10/25 12:17, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Thu Jul 10, 2025 at 10:42 AM CEST, Michal Wilczynski wrote:
>> I was hoping you could clarify the intended merge path for this series,
>> as it introduces changes to both the Rust and PWM subsystems.
>>
>> Is the expectation that the Rust maintainers will take the abstraction
>> patches into the Rust tree first? Or would Uwe, as the PWM maintainer,
>> pull the entire series? Any guidance on the coordination would be very
>> helpful.
>
> Except for the helpers I only see PWM code, so this is fully on Uwe's purview I
> think.
>
> I see that there is a new MAINTAINERS entry:
>
> PWM SUBSYSTEM BINDINGS [RUST]
> M: Michal Wilczynski <m.wilczynski@...sung.com>
> S: Maintained
> F: rust/helpers/pwm.c
> F: rust/kernel/pwm.rs
>
> I assume this is agreed with Uwe?
>
> In case there's no agreement yet, the typical options are:
>
> 1) Maintain the Rust abstractions as part of the existing MAINTAINERS entry.
> Optionally, the author can be added as another maintainer or reviewer.
>
> 2) Add a separate MAINTAINERS entry; patches / PRs still go through the same
> subsystem tree.
>
> 3) Add a separate MAINTAINERS entry; patches don't go through the subsystem
> tree (e.g. because the subsystem maintainers don't want to deal with it).
>
> I don't recommend (3), since it's really just a fallback.
>
> The above looks like (2). In this case I recommend to also add the C maintainers
> as reviewers, such that they can easily follow along and specifiy the tree (T:).
>
> But, of course, that's up to you and Uwe.
Thanks, it is not agreed yet, I've included a MAINTAINERS entry, since I
would like to help with the maintenance of the code, so I would also
vote for the 2) option, but ultimately it's an Uwe decision so I would
be happy to follow on anything he decides.
>
>> I understand that it may be too late in the development cycle to merge
>> the full series. If that's the case, perhaps patch 2 could be considered
>> on its own, as it hasn't received comments in the last couple of
>> revisions. As another possibility, patch 1 and patch 3 are dependent on
>> each other and could be applied as a pair, depending on your assessment.
>>
>> The RISC-V driver itself would need to wait for the IoMem series merge [1].
>>
>> [1] - https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20250704-topics-tyr-platform_iomem-v12-0-1d3d4bd8207d@collabora.com/
>>
>> Best regards,
>
>
Best regards,
--
Michal Wilczynski <m.wilczynski@...sung.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists