On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 2:44 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/5/20 6:03 PM, Maximilian Luz wrote: > > As has come up in the discussion around > > > > [RFC PATCH] Add support for Microsoft Surface System Aggregator Module > > > > it may make sense to add a Microsoft Surface specific platform > > subdirectory. Andy has suggested drivers/platform/surface for that. > > This series follows said suggestion and creates that subdirectory, as > > well as moves Microsoft Surface related drivers over to it and updates > > their MAINTAINERS entries (if available) accordingly. > > > > This series does not modify any existing driver code, symbols, or help > > text. > > In case you do not know I'm taking over from any as > drivers/platform/x86 maintainer. > > I'm fine with the concept of this series, but who is going to maintain > this new drivers/platform/surface directory ? > > Ah I see that the first patch answers that question and the plan > is to keep this part of the pdx86 maintainership. > > I would prefer for the new dir to have its own > MAINTAINERS entry if I'm honest, I would like to try and > split maintainership for the surface stuff as follows: > > 1. Who will review (and add their Reviewed-by or ask for improvements > or nack) patches to files in this dir? > > 2. Who will gather approved patches apply them to a for-next branch > and send them out to Linus during the merge Window? > > I can pick up 2. but I could really use some help with 1. So I > was thinking having a separate MAINTAINERS entry for the new > dir with you (Maximilian) (and me and Mark Gross) listed as > MAINTAINERS; and then I'm hoping that you can do the review > of surface related patches. At least those which you have not > written yourself. The idea was exactly like you described, i.e. taking 2 while relying on 1 done by someone more familiar with that. JFYI: for Mellanox we required Vadim to Rb their code before us. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
