[PATCH v2 2/2] clk: cdce9xxx: Add maintainer

Sean Anderson seanga2 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 16 15:29:40 CET 2021

On 12/16/21 9:07 AM, Tero Kristo wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 15:57, Sean Anderson wrote:
>> On 12/16/21 8:17 AM, Tero Kristo wrote:
>>> On 15/12/2021 18:47, Sean Anderson wrote:
>>>> This adds an entry in MAINTAINERS for the cdce9xx driver, since it was not
>>>> added when the driver was submitted. This will help future submitters
>>>> figure out who to CC.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <seanga2 at gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Tero, if you don't want to maintain this I'll resubmit this patch with the
>>>> orphaned status. Alternatively, perhaps Tom wants to maintain this driver since
>>>> it is used exclusively by boards he maintains.
>>> Well, I am not actively maintaining this, as I am not employed by TI anymore. :)
>>> That said, I don't see how much work there is needed for this driver anyways, it is very simple, and it can be considered "completed". That's the reason I didn't initially put any maintainer on it. Marking it "orphaned" would be a bit too harsh status for it imho, as it is still used by TI platforms, and it gets actively tested by them.
>> Well, the issue that I would like to resolve is that in order to CC you
>> I had to look up who did the initial commit, and even then the email was
>> wrong (since it had your TI email). So for the benefit of future
>> hackers, I would like to record your current email. I suppose your
>> Reviewed-By on the first patch will do.
> Yes, I understand your point, however adding a maintainer entry for every tiny driver is a bit of an overkill.

I think it's great to have. It helps submitters know who to CC, and it
helps me know who I need a review/ack from. It also helps to know who
has hardware if a change needs testing, though perhaps you don't have
access to this hardware any more.

> And well, it would also need an ack from the subsystem maintainer itself, whether he/she wants to share the workload on it or not.

Because Lukasz has not been very active lately, I volunteered to be
clock subsystem maintainer.

> U-boot contains a script called get_maintainer, that can be used to fetch the valid maintainer entry for a file. In this case, it reports Lukasz, which, imho, is just fine. cdce9xxx is not going to face many changes, and if any, those are just generic framework changes/fixes which can be handled just fine by the subsystem maintainers.

And that is why I wanted to have your email in MAINTAINERS. But since
you reviewed the other patch, I think it will pick up your new email. So
I don't think this patch is necessary.


More information about the U-Boot mailing list