Em Wed, 12 Sep 2018 15:26:48 -0500 Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > +Joe P > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 10:17 AM Mauro Carvalho Chehab > <mchehab+samsung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Em Tue, 28 Aug 2018 10:44:33 -0500 > > Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > > > > > In preparation to remove the node name pointer from struct device_node, > > > convert printf users to use the %pOFn format specifier. > > > > > > Cc: Steve Longerbeam <slongerbeam@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Cc: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > v2: > > > - fix conditional use of node name vs devname for imx > > > > > > drivers/staging/media/imx/imx-media-dev.c | 15 ++++++++++----- > > > drivers/staging/media/imx/imx-media-of.c | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/staging/mt7621-eth/mdio.c | 4 ++-- > > > > It would be better if you had submitted the staging/media stuff > > on a separate patch, as they usually go via the media tree. > > Sorry, I thought Greg took all of staging. No, I usually take media patches on staging. It seems that at least the IIO subsystem does the same: IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS M: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> R: Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@xxxxxx> R: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> R: Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@xxxxxxxxxx> L: linux-iio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jic23/iio.git S: Maintained F: Documentation/ABI/testing/configfs-iio* F: Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-iio* F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/ F: drivers/iio/ F: drivers/staging/iio/ F: include/linux/iio/ F: tools/iio/ Anyway, as I said before, I don't have any issues if Greg takes this specific patch. > A problem with MAINTAINERS is there is no way to tell who applies > patches for a given path vs. anyone else listed. This frequently > happens when the maintainer organization doesn't match the directory > org. If we distinguished this, then it would be quite easy to see when > you've created a patch that needs to be split to different maintainers > (or an explanation why it isn't). Whatever happened with splitting up > MAINTAINERS? If there was a file for each maintainer tree, then it > would be easier to extract that information. Yes, but, on the other hand, get_maintainers.pl would likely take more time to process, if a patch touches multiple subsystems. > > Or maybe we just need to be stricter with the 'M' vs. 'R' tag and 'M' > means that is the person who applies the patch. I don't think many > drivers have their own tree and maintainer except for a few big ones. Hmm... just getting a random file under staging/media: ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f drivers/staging/media/imx/imx-ic.h Steve Longerbeam <slongerbeam@xxxxxxxxx> (maintainer:MEDIA DRIVERS FOR FREESCALE IMX) Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (maintainer:MEDIA DRIVERS FOR FREESCALE IMX) Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> (maintainer:MEDIA INPUT INFRASTRUCTURE (V4L/DVB)) Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (supporter:STAGING SUBSYSTEM) linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list:MEDIA DRIVERS FOR FREESCALE IMX) devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM) linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list) It seems that the maintainers are already ordered by the tree depth (placing the most relevant results first). So, both driver maintainers appear first, then me and finally Greg (as supporter). Mailing lists are also ordered by relevance: media ML, then staging ML and finally LKML. Thanks, Mauro _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
