On 10/24/22 14:08, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2022-10-24 at 10:56 +0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote: >> On 10/24/22 13:40, Joe Perches wrote: > [] >>> >>> S: *Status*, one of the following: >>> Supported: Someone is actually paid to look after this. > Maintained: Someone actually looks after it. >>> >>> "this" is this particular driver, not any subsystem "above" it. >> >> Yes. And as I wrote, I am paid to look after this driver as well as >> other drivers I've submitted upstream for ROHM components (Kionix being >> part of ROHM these days). I have used this Supported + Reviewer >> combination for all other IC drivers as well. This is why, by >> definition, the S eg. supported is correct. Question is whether one >> supporting a driver must be a maintainer? If this is the case, then I'd >> better review all of my MAINTAINER entries. However, I (still) don't see >> the problem of having a reviewer supporting the IC. > > Please do not conflate a "reviewer", someone that "might" look at > a patch and offer comments, and a "supporter", someone that actively > supports the driver/subsystem. I don't have a tree that is pulled > yet I am the get_maintainer and checkpatch maintainer. I'd like to ask what the "actively support a driver" means in practice as I am pretty sure that is what I do. So perhaps I should change myself from a reviewer to a maintainer for these drivers then. Yours -- Matti -- Matti Vaittinen Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors Oulu Finland ~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~
