search for: get_maintainer

...entry type in MAINTAINERS which performs a regex match against filenames; either those extracted from patch +++ or --- lines, or those specified on the command-line using the -f option. This provides the same benefits as using a K: regex option to match a set of filenames (see commit eb90d08 "get_maintainer: allow keywords to match filenames"), but without the disadvantage that "random" file content, such as comments, will ever match the regex. Suggested-by: Joe Perches <joe at perches.com> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren at nvidia.com> --- v2: Corrected typo in MAI...

...entry type in MAINTAINERS which performs a regex match against filenames; either those extracted from patch +++ or --- lines, or those specified on the command-line using the -f option. This provides the same benefits as using a K: regex option to match a set of filenames (see commit eb90d08 "get_maintainer: allow keywords to match filenames"), but without the disadvantage that "random" file content, such as comments, will ever match the regex. Suggested-by: Joe Perches <joe at perches.com> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren at nvidia.com> --- MAINTAINERS...

...entry type in MAINTAINERS which performs a regex match against filenames; either those extracted from patch +++ or --- lines, or those specified on the command-line using the -f option. This provides the same benefits as using a K: regex option to match a set of filenames (see commit eb90d08 "get_maintainer: allow keywords to match filenames"), but without the disadvantage that "random" file content, such as comments, will ever match the regex. Hence, revert most of that commit. Switch the Tegra entry from using K: to N: Reported-by: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz at gmail.com>...

...this now, off late we have seen quite a few changes that touched the "arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c" file but were not directed to me, someone else made me aware of those changes. It could be that my use of different SOB lines "Alok N Kataria" vs "Alok Kataria" confuses get_maintainer.pl, but adding this entry in MAINTAINERS should solve the problem at hand. For one of the changes [1], I did verify that get_maintainer.pl, now expectedly includes me in the cc list. Thanks, Alok [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137571112610984&w=2 >From : Alok Kataria <akat...

...this now, off late we have seen quite a few changes that touched the "arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c" file but were not directed to me, someone else made me aware of those changes. It could be that my use of different SOB lines "Alok N Kataria" vs "Alok Kataria" confuses get_maintainer.pl, but adding this entry in MAINTAINERS should solve the problem at hand. For one of the changes [1], I did verify that get_maintainer.pl, now expectedly includes me in the cc list. Thanks, Alok [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137571112610984&w=2 >From : Alok Kataria <akat...

With the numbers of patches flying around it can be a bit hard for a maintainer to spot patches which (s)he is expected to comment on / deal with, especially now that we have a larger number of maintainers of varying subsystems etc. I think it might be time to start asking patch submitters to CC the maintainers of the code they are touching, based on the MAINTAINERS file. If people (specifically

Dropping Tegra ML, it's not the place where Nouveau mails should go. Adding Nouveau ML and Maarten, who probably knows Lockdep+Nouveau best. Am Montag, den 04.03.2013, 22:16 +0100 schrieb Borislav Petkov: > New -rc1, so let the stabilization games begin. > > I see the following on rc1, let me know if you need more info. > > > [ 0.633617]

...I'd like to bring in the similar way of linux/MAINTAINERS, records fs relevant mailing lists, reviewers or supporters (or call co-maintainers). To recognize the contribution from them, and help more users to know who or what mailing list can be added in CC list of a patch. (The MAINTAINERS and get_maintainer.pl are copied from linux project, then I made some changes for fstests specially.) PATCH 3~5 are still under reviewing, hasn't been decided... About [3/5], if someone mailing list doesn't want to be in cc list of related fstests patch, please clarify, I'll remove. About [4/5], if som...

...t never hurts to add MAINTAINER entries. > If you are thinking why do this now, off late we have seen quite a few > changes that touched the "arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c" file but were > not directed to me, someone else made me aware of those changes. Many people don't use get_maintainer > It > could be that my use of different SOB lines "Alok N Kataria" vs "Alok > Kataria" confuses get_maintainer.pl, That shouldn't be a problem unless the email addresses are also different. > +++ linux-2.6/MAINTAINERS 2013-09-04 14:20:39.714026943 +0530 [] &g...

...> > But the macro is only used here, and the variables aren't used at all, > > so it makes no sense in this file. > > Maybe it's because I didn't CC you on the rest of the series. I wasn't > sure what the proper distribution list is for each part. Use scripts/get_maintainer.pl, that's what it is there for. A number of those patches should go through me, if not all of them, if you want them merged... > > This new macro is also used in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c and > vmw_balloon.c And it's used inconsistantly in those patches (you don't set t...

...> > But the macro is only used here, and the variables aren't used at all, > > so it makes no sense in this file. > > Maybe it's because I didn't CC you on the rest of the series. I wasn't > sure what the proper distribution list is for each part. Use scripts/get_maintainer.pl, that's what it is there for. A number of those patches should go through me, if not all of them, if you want them merged... > > This new macro is also used in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c and > vmw_balloon.c And it's used inconsistantly in those patches (you don't set t...

...gt; > > > Maybe send patch dropping include/uapi/ from there, > > should help drive the volumes down? > > This would be an overkill IMO. It would be much more preferable if > people actually think about who from the suggested list (either from > MAINTAINERS or ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl) should be really added. > > [...] Yea, think about it, then what? I've no idea what is linux-abi for, and what people subscribed there are interested in. How should I? All I know is what's in MAINTAINERS, which say "ABI/API". So I copy all ABI/API patches there. >...

...gt; > > > Maybe send patch dropping include/uapi/ from there, > > should help drive the volumes down? > > This would be an overkill IMO. It would be much more preferable if > people actually think about who from the suggested list (either from > MAINTAINERS or ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl) should be really added. > > [...] Yea, think about it, then what? I've no idea what is linux-abi for, and what people subscribed there are interested in. How should I? All I know is what's in MAINTAINERS, which say "ABI/API". So I copy all ABI/API patches there. >...

...ally (due to being human) incomplete. This document is > +meant as a guide to using the various memory barriers provided by Linux, but > +in case of any doubt (and there are many) please ask. It might be worth adding you and me to the top of the file, to save Paul Cc'ing us on questions (get_maintainer.pl points at poor old Corbet for this file). But yes, it seems that something like this is required. Will

...ally (due to being human) incomplete. This document is > +meant as a guide to using the various memory barriers provided by Linux, but > +in case of any doubt (and there are many) please ask. It might be worth adding you and me to the top of the file, to save Paul Cc'ing us on questions (get_maintainer.pl points at poor old Corbet for this file). But yes, it seems that something like this is required. Will

Hello, I find a strange behavior. When a machine is slow (or with many debug traces or a qemu vm), a interrupt can occur between the pv_irq_ops initialization and the xen_vcpu[0] initialization. This lead to a problem because some operations in xen_irq_ops use xen_vcpu. I send you a patch to fix that but I''m not quite sure that is the right solution. Regards, Anthoine From

...aren't used at all, > > > > so it makes no sense in this file. > > > > > > Maybe it's because I didn't CC you on the rest of the series. I wasn't > > > sure what the proper distribution list is for each part. > > > > Use scripts/get_maintainer.pl, that's what it is there for. A number of > > those patches should go through me, if not all of them, if you want them > > merged... > > > > > > > > This new macro is also used in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c and > > > vmw_balloon.c > >...

...aren't used at all, > > > > so it makes no sense in this file. > > > > > > Maybe it's because I didn't CC you on the rest of the series. I wasn't > > > sure what the proper distribution list is for each part. > > > > Use scripts/get_maintainer.pl, that's what it is there for. A number of > > those patches should go through me, if not all of them, if you want them > > merged... > > > > > > > > This new macro is also used in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c and > > > vmw_balloon.c > >...

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 02:06:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 15-01-15 13:39:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Most of our code has > > struct foo { > > } > > > > Fix two instances where balloon is inconsistent. > > I hate to complain but is it really necessary to post such patches to > linux-api? Well it's human to err, so it seems wise to

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 02:06:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 15-01-15 13:39:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Most of our code has > > struct foo { > > } > > > > Fix two instances where balloon is inconsistent. > > I hate to complain but is it really necessary to post such patches to > linux-api? Well it's human to err, so it seems wise to