Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes:
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 at 15:52, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Place all files that can be useful to rebuild the Coverity
>> configuration in scripts/coverity-scan: the existing model
>> file, and the components setup.
>>
>> The Markdown syntax was tested with Pandoc (but in any case
>> is meant more as a human-readable reference than as a part
>> of documentation).
>>
>> Suggested-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> scripts/coverity-scan/COMPONENTS.md | 154 ++++++++++++++++++
>> .../model.c} | 0
>> 2 files changed, 154 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 scripts/coverity-scan/COMPONENTS.md
>> rename scripts/{coverity-model.c => coverity-scan/model.c} (100%)
>
> MAINTAINERS has a section
>
> # Coverity model
> # M: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
> # S: Supported
> # F: scripts/coverity-model.c
>
> which needs updating for the file move.
With that:
Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
> Should we just combine that with the following section?
> # Coverity Scan integration
> # M: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
> # S: Maintained
> # F: scripts/coverity-scan/
I can review model patches, but I know nothing about the Coverity Scan
integration. You do.
As is, MAINTAINERS reflects this split in expertise. Combining the two
sections loses that. Do we care?
> Otherwise
>
> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
