linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation/process: maintainer-soc: Be more explicit about defconfig

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: <87ecolxlvk.fsf@trenco.lwn.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 08:23:43 -0700
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>, Arnd
 Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Alexandre
 Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, Linus Walleij
 <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Drew Fustini <fustini@...nel.org>,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, soc@...ts.linux.dev,
 workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation/process: maintainer-soc: Be more
 explicit about defconfig

Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com> writes:

> It is already documented but people still send noticeable amount of
> patches ignoring the rule - get_maintainers.pl does not work on
> arm64/configs/defconfig or any other shared ARM defconfig.
>
> Be more explicit, that one must not rely on typical/simple approach
> here for getting To/Cc list.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>
>
> ---
>
> Incorrectly addressed patches for arm64/defconfig are around ~2 per month...
> ---
>  Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst
> index 3ba886f52a51..014c639022b2 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst
> @@ -57,8 +57,10 @@ Submitting Patches for Given SoC
>  
>  All typical platform related patches should be sent via SoC submaintainers
>  (platform-specific maintainers).  This includes also changes to per-platform or
> -shared defconfigs (scripts/get_maintainer.pl might not provide correct
> -addresses in such case).
> +shared defconfigs. Note that scripts/get_maintainer.pl might not provide
> +correct addresses for the shared defconfig, so ignore its output and manually
> +create CC-list based on MAINTAINERS file or use something like
> +``scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f drivers/soc/FOO/``).
>  

Like Laurent, I don't see this as being effective.  Why is it that
get_maintainer.pl fails here?  It seems far better to fix that, if at
all possible, rather than expect random contributors to notice this text
and work around the problem...?

Thanks,

jon