From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> The current patch acceptance policy requires that specifications are approved by the RISC-V foundation, but we rely on external specifications as well. This explicitly calls out the UEFI specifications that we're starting to depend on. Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Atish Patra <atishp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst index 0a6199233ede..9fed6b318b49 100644 --- a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst +++ b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst @@ -20,9 +20,11 @@ Submit Checklist Addendum ------------------------- We'll only accept patches for new modules or extensions if the specifications for those modules or extensions are listed as being -"Frozen" or "Ratified" by the RISC-V Foundation. (Developers may, of -course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees that contain code for -any draft extensions that they wish.) +unlikely to be incompatibly changed in the future. For +specifications from the RISC-V foundation this means "Frozen" or +"Ratified", for the UEFI forum specifications this means a published +ECR. (Developers may, of course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees +that contain code for any draft extensions that they wish.) Additionally, the RISC-V specification allows implementors to create their own custom extensions. These custom extensions aren't required -- 2.38.0
