[PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add maintainers for arm64 acpi

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 10:59:46AM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:

On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Randy Dunlap [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 03/03/2014 06:21 PM, Joe Perches wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 10:15 +0800, Graeme Gregory wrote:

quoted

Add maintainers for the arm-core file for arm64 ACPI support

Shouldn't something have to be in the kernel
tree before there's a MAINTAINERS entry?

or in linux-next and the patch can be added to linux-next (some git tree).

Sure, it makes sense to merge this file along with the rest of the
series, but I certainly appreciate that Graeme and Hanjun are willing
to volunteer to do this work.

Well, to put it another way, it makes no sense at all to merge this patch
independently.

On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Catalin Marinas [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 02:15:45AM +0000, Graeme Gregory wrote:

quoted

+ACPI ARM64

That's a pretty broad statement for a single file. Is it core support,
architected peripherals, SoC?

That's a good point. Graeme, it would be good if you could put some
text in the patch describing how you propose the maintainership to
work. Unfortunately the maintainers file doesn't have any kind of
comments field, otherwise I'd suggest you make those comments directly
there.

Given that ACPI can touch a lot of subsystems I would expect you and
Hanjun not to be merging much code directly, but being listed in
maintainers means that you will be kept in the loop when it comes to
merging ARM ACPI changes. I would also expect that anything that does
go through you (instead of merely acked) would be merged via Rafael
and Len's tree.

quoted

quoted

+M:   Hanjun Guo [off-list ref]
+M:   Graeme Gregory [off-list ref]
+S:   Supported
+L:   linux-acpi at vger.kernel.org
+F:   drivers/acpi/plat/arm-core.c

This patch should be part of the series introducing the arm-core.c file
and it will be ACKed (or NAKed) following review. We can't really commit
maintainers to a file which does not exist in mainline and while there is
still feedback to be addressed. It's like a blank cheque.

I agree with merging it with the rest of the series, but comparing it
to a blank cheque is not appropriate. Merely having an entry in
MAINTAINERS doesn't immediately confer trust or ability to merge code,
but it does tell people who to talk to when looking at ACPI on ARM.
You can bet that neither Linus, Len or Rafael will merge ARM ACPI
trees from them if you disagree. (And even if they did, you would
yell, and Linus would revert it).

If you want to know who to talk to regarding a subsystem then you use
get_maintainer.pl and/or git blame. Regardless of this patch, neither of
those tools will identify Graeme or Hanjun as the contacts for ACPI on ARM.

I think we're in agreement, but just to spell it out: this patch should be
included at the end of a series adding the files which will be maintained.

Will