Hi Christian, On Fri, 26 Jun 2020, 18:10 Daniel Vetter, <dan...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:03 AM Christian König > <christian.koe...@amd.com> wrote: > > > > Am 26.06.20 um 06:43 schrieb Sumit Semwal: > > > On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 01:24, Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > >> Ignoring everything else ... > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 9:28 PM Jani Nikula < > jani.nik...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > >>> As a side note, there seem to be extra checks in place for acks when > > >>> applying non-i915 patches to drm-intel; there are no such checks for > > >>> drm-misc. > > >> One option to generalize that that I pondered is to consult > > >> get_maintainers.pl asking for git repo link, and if that returns > > >> something else, then insist that there's an ack from a relevant > > >> maintainer. It's a bit of typing, but I think the bigger problem is > > >> that there's a ton of false positives. > > > Right; for the particular patch, I wasn't even in the to: or cc: field > > > and that made it slip from my radar. I would definitely ask any one > > > sending patches for dma-buf directory to follow the get_maintainers.pl > > > religiously. > > >> But maybe that's a good thing, would give some motivation to keep > > >> MAINTAINERS updated. > > > > Should I maybe add myself as maintainer as well? I've written enough > > stuff in there to know the code quite a bit. > > I think that makes lots of sense, since defacto you already are :-) > > If you feel like bikeshed, get_maintainers.pl also supports R: for > reviewer, but given that you also push patches to drm-misc M: for > maintainer feels more accurate. > I think given you've been reviewing and changing most of the code around dma-fences, it should be ok to add you as the maintainer for those bits? -Daniel > Best, Sumit.
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
