Hi Mauro, On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 01:19:21PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Document the basic policies of the media subsystem profile. > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > > That's basically a modified version of: > https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/52999/ > > Applied to the new template > > Documentation/media/index.rst | 1 + > .../media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 140 ++++++++++++++++++ > MAINTAINERS | 1 + > 3 files changed, 142 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > diff --git a/Documentation/media/index.rst b/Documentation/media/index.rst > index 0301c25ff887..ac94685b822a 100644 > --- a/Documentation/media/index.rst > +++ b/Documentation/media/index.rst > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ Linux Media Subsystem Documentation > .. toctree:: > :maxdepth: 2 > > + maintainer-entry-profile > media_uapi > media_kapi > dvb-drivers/index > diff --git a/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst b/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..81d3b0f9c36a > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > @@ -0,0 +1,140 @@ > +Media Subsystem Profile > +======================= > + > +Overview > +-------- > + > +The media subsystem cover support for a variety of devices: stream s/cover/covers/ > +capture, analog and digital TV, cameras, remote controllers, HDMI CEC > +and media pipeline control. > + > +It covers, mainly, the contents of those directories: > + > + - drivers/media > + - drivers/staging/media > + - Documentation/media > + - include/media > + > +Both media userspace and Kernel APIs are documented and should be kept in > +sync with the API changes. It means that all patches that add new > +features to the subsystem should also bring changes to the corresponding > +API files. > + > +Also, patches for device drivers that changes the Open Firmware/Device > +Tree bindings should be reviewed by the Device Tree maintainers. You may want to make it clear that this covers bindings only, not driver code that parses the DT. I would just remove "for device drivers", as the rule should also apply to DT bindings documentation that is not driver-specific. > +Due to the size and wide scope of the media subsystem, media's > +maintainership model is to have sub-maintainers that have a broad > +knowledge of an specific aspect of the subsystem. It is a > +sub-maintainers task to review the patches, providing feedback to users s/sub-maintainers/sub-maintainer's/ > +if the patches are following the subsystem rules and are properly using > +the media internal and external APIs. > + > +Patches for the media subsystem should be sent to the media mailing list > +at linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx as plain text only e-mail. Emails with > +HTML will be automatically rejected by the mail server. There's no need > +to copy the maintainer or sub-maintainer(s). There's too much traffic on mailing lists for me to follow everything, I much prefer being CC'ed on patches. > +Media's workflow is heavily based on Patchwork, meaning that, once a patch > +is submitted, it should appear at: > + > + - https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/list/ > + > +If it doesn't automatically appear there after a few minutes, then > +probably something got wrong on your submission. Please check if the > +email is in plain text only and if your emailer is not mangling with > +whitespaces before complaining or submit it again. > + > +Sub-maintainers > ++++++++++++++++ > + > +At the media subsystem, we have a group of senior developers that are How about "experienced" instead of "senior" ? Quality doesn't always come with age, neither for people nor wine :-) > +responsible for doing the code reviews at the drivers (called > +sub-maintainers), and another senior developer responsible for the > +subsystem as a hole. For core changes, whenever possible, multiple > +media (sub-)maintainers do the review. > + > +The sub-maintainers work on specific areas of the subsystem, as > +described below: > + > +Digital TV: > + Sean Young <sean@xxxxxxxx> > + > +HDMI CEC: > + Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> > + > +Media controller drivers: > + Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > + > +Remote Controllers: > + Sean Young <sean@xxxxxxxx> > + > +Sensor drivers: > + Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > + > +V4L2 drivers: > + Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> > + > +Submit Checklist Addendum > +------------------------- > + > +There is a set of compliance tools at https://git.linuxtv.org/v4l-utils.git/ > +that should be used in order to check if the drivers are properly > +implementing the media APIs. > + > +Those tests need to be passed before the patches go upstream. s/need to be passed/need to pass/ > + > +Also, please notice that we build the Kernel with:: > + > + make CF=-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__ CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y C=1 W=1 CHECK=check_script > + > +Where the check script is:: > + > + #!/bin/bash > + /devel/smatch/smatch -p=kernel $@ >&2 > + /devel/sparse/sparse $@ >&2 > + > +Be sure to not introduce new warnings on your patches. While static analysers deliver value, I fear this is a high barrier to entry for new contributors. > + > +Key Cycle Dates > +--------------- > + > +New submissions can be sent at any time, but if they intend to hit the > +next merge window they should be sent before -rc5, and ideally stabilized > +in the linux-media branch by -rc6. > + > +Coding Style Addendum > +--------------------- > + > +Media development uses checkpatch on strict mode to verify the code style, e. g.:: > + > + $ ./script/checkpatch.pl --strict But we still accept some warnings. I think this should be documented. > + > +Review Cadence > +-------------- > + > +Provided that your patch is at https://patchwork.linuxtv.org, it should > +be sooner or later handled, so you don't need to re-submit a patch. > + > +Except for bug fixes, we don't usually add new patches to the development > +tree between -rc6 and the next -rc1. > + > +Please notice that the media subsystem is a high traffic one, so it > +could take a while for us to be able to review your patches. Feel free > +to ping if you don't get a feedback on a couple of weeks or to ask s/on a/in a/ > +other developers to publicly add Reviewed-by and, more importantly, > +Tested-by tags. > + > +Please notice that we expect a detailed description for Tested-by, s/notice/note/ > +identifying what boards were used at the test and what it was tested. > + > +Style Cleanup Patches > +--------------------- > + > +Style-cleanups are welcome when they come together with other changes > +at the files where the style changes will affect. > + > +We may accept pure standalone style-cleanups, but they should be grouped > +per directory. So, for example, if you're doing a cleanup at drivers > +under drivers/media, please send a single patch for all drivers under > +drivers/media/pci, another one for drivers/media/usb and so on. How about also stating that if the cleanup is low volume, a single patch for the whole subsystem is preferred ? I think that should actually be the rule, with a split to ease review only when the patch would be too big. > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 7c62b45201d7..e7f44ec05a42 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -10077,6 +10077,7 @@ W: https://linuxtv.org > Q: http://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-media/list/ > T: git git://linuxtv.org/media_tree.git > S: Maintained > +P: Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/ > F: Documentation/media/ > F: drivers/media/ -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
