lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Are people from linux-mediatek also interested in Mediatek MIPS SoCs? [Was: [PATCH] staging: mt7621-dts: add dt node for 2nd/3rd uart on mt7621]
From
Date


On 06/02/2020 08:53, Chuanhong Guo wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 6:37 PM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 05:59:21PM +0800, Chuanhong Guo wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 5:47 PM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Please use ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl to pick the CC list and resend.
>>>>
>>>> The MAINTAINERS file says Matthias Brugger is supposed to be CC'd and
>>>> a couple other email lists.
>>>
>>> According to get_maintainer.pl, Matthias Brugger is the maintainer of
>>> Mediatek ARM SoC:
>>>
>>> Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com> (maintainer:ARM/Mediatek SoC support)
>>> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support)
>>> linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org (moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support)
>>>
>>> I specifically removed the above 3 addresses because they are all for
>>> Mediatek ARM chips
>>> while mt7621 is a mips chip and belongs to ralink target under
>>> /arch/mips/mach-ralink.
>>> Code contribution for mt7621 goes through linux-mips instead of
>>> linux-arm or linux-mediatek,
>>
>> I would have thought that we would still CC linux-mediatek?
>>
>>>
>>> I thinks this is an incorrect setup of get_maintainer.pl and should be
>>> corrected.
>>
>> We could ask him...
>>
>> It's always easiest to fix MAINTAINERS instead of remembering all the
>> exceptions and rules.
>
> Hi Matthias and other folks on linux-mediatek:
>
> I noticed that get_maintainers.pl reports "ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
> e-mail addreses for MTK MIPS SoCs (mt7620/mt7621/mt76x8) because of
> "mt[678]" name match in MAINTAINERS file.
> This is confusing because these MIPS SoCs clearly don't fall into
> "ARM" category. Is this an incorrect match or is it intentional? If
> it's intentional I think we should remove the confusing ARM prefix,
> and if it's incorrect we may need to figure out how to exclude
> mt7620/mt7621/mt76x8 from "ARM/Mediatek SoC support".
>

That's a good question. I think it's an accident as I don't have good knowledge
of the MIPS architecture. Also I try to track the upstream support for MIPS as well:
https://mtk.bcnfs.org/doku.php?id=linux_mainline_effort

Regards,
Matthias

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-09 19:30    [W:0.055 / U:2.952 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site