netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] docs: netdev: document requirements for Supported status

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: <20250110103911.GW7706@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 10:39:11 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
	pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] docs: netdev: document requirements for
 Supported status

On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 04:52:19PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> As announced back in April, require running upstream tests
> to maintain Supported status for NIC drivers:
> 
>   https://lore.kernel.org/20240425114200.3effe773@kernel.org
> 
> Multiple vendors have been "working on it" for months.
> Let's make it official.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 46 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst

...

> +The driver maintainer may arrange for someone else to run the test,
> +there is no requirement for the person listed as maintainer (or their
> +employer) to be responsible for running the tests. Collaboration between
> +vendors, hosting GH CI, other repos under linux-netdev, etc. are most welcome.

nit: are -> is

> +
> +See https://github.com/linux-netdev/nipa/wiki for more infromation about

nit: information

> +netdev CI. Feel free to reach out to maintainers or the list with any questions.
> +
>  Reviewer guidance
>  -----------------

Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>