> On 21 Jul 2021, at 11:00, Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 08:46:15AM +0000, Jorgen Hansen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 20 Jul 2021, at 12:39, Greg KH <gregkh at
linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 03:29:01AM -0700, Jorgen Hansen wrote:
>>>> Add maintainer info for the VMware VMCI driver.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jorgen Hansen <jhansen at vmware.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> MAINTAINERS | 8 ++++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>>>> index a61f4f3..7e7c6fa 100644
>>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
>>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>>>> @@ -19792,6 +19792,14 @@ L: netdev at vger.kernel.org
>>>> S: Supported
>>>> F: drivers/ptp/ptp_vmw.c
>>>>
>>>> +VMWARE VMCI DRIVER
>>>> +M: Jorgen Hansen <jhansen at vmware.com>
>>>> +M: Vishnu Dasa <vdasa at vmware.com>
>>>> +M: "VMware, Inc." <pv-drivers at vmware.com>
>>>
>>> Please do not use generic aliases as they provide no personal
>>> responsibility. Just stick with real people.
>>
>> That makes sense. However, the pv-drivers list is used for keeping
managers
>> and people helping with testing in the loop. So would adding pv-drivers
as a
>> second L: entry be OK?
>
> Is it really a list? If not, then that would not make much sense.
It is - with VMware subscribers only but anyone can post to it. If the intent of
the
L: entries is to allow folks to subscribe to relevant information, then it isn?t
appropriate.
All existing vmw driver maintainer entries have pv-drivers as an M: entry,
so has there been a change in policy regarding this? The approach has
been quite useful for us.