[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8977553d1b52e567f72abc2ccad0eb5bca62e242.camel@perches.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 11:54:25 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: update phylink/sfp keyword matching
On Wed, 2020-08-05 at 19:22 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 11:11:28AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 7:34 AM Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > Is this something you're willing to merge directly please?
> >
> > Done.
> >
> > That said:
> >
> > > -K: phylink
> > > +K: phylink\.h|struct\s+phylink|\.phylink|>phylink_|phylink_(autoneg|clear|connect|create|destroy|disconnect|ethtool|helper|mac|mii|of|set|start|stop|test|validate)
> >
> > That's a very awkward pattern. I wonder if there could be better ways
> > to express this (ie "only apply this pattern to these files" kind of
> > thing)
>
> Yes, it's extremely awkward - I spent much of the morning with perl
> testing it out on the drivers/ subtree.
And perhaps easier to read would be to use multiple K: lines.
(?: used to avoid unnecessary capture groups)
K: phylink\.h|struct\s+phylink
K: (?:\.|\-\>)phylink_
K: phylink_(?:autoneg|clear|connect|create|destroy|disconnect|ethtool|helper|mac|mii|of|set|start|stop|test|validate)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists