On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 11:48:14AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 03:42:02PM -0400, Sean Paul wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 09:52:27AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > Move drm-misc under the common committer guidelines.
> > > 
> > > v2: s/drm-intel/drm-misc/ under tooling (Emil)
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Daniel Stone <[email protected]>
> > > Reviewed-by: Emil Velikov <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > >  committer-drm-misc.rst   | 101 
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  committer-guidelines.rst |   1 +
> > >  drm-misc.rst             |  95 
> > > --------------------------------------------
> > >  3 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-)
> > >  create mode 100644 committer-drm-misc.rst
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/committer-drm-misc.rst b/committer-drm-misc.rst
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..53cffea548ff
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/committer-drm-misc.rst
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
> > > +.. _committer-drm-misc:
> > > +
> > > +===============================
> > > + drm-misc Committer Guidelines
> > > +===============================
> > > +
> > > +This document describes the detailed merge criteria and committer 
> > > guidelines for
> > > +drm-misc. The same criteria and guidelines apply equally to both 
> > > committers and
> > > +maintainers.
> > > +
> > > +Where Do I Apply My Patch?
> > > +==========================
> > > +
> > > +Consult this handy flowchart to determine the best branch for your 
> > > patch. If in
> > > +doubt, apply to drm-misc-next or ask your favorite maintainer on IRC.
> > > +
> > > +.. image:: drm-misc-commit-flow.svg
> > > +
> > > +Merge Criteria
> > > +==============
> > > +
> > > +Right now the only hard merge criteria are:
> > > +
> > > +* Patch is properly reviewed or at least Ack, i.e. don't just push your 
> > > own
> > > +  stuff directly. This rule holds even more for bugfix patches - it 
> > > would be
> > > +  embarrassing if the bugfix contains a small gotcha that review would 
> > > have
> > > +  caught.
> > > +
> > > +* drm-misc is for drm core (non-driver) patches, subsystem-wide 
> > > refactorings,
> > > +  and small trivial patches all over (including drivers). For a detailed 
> > > list of
> > > +  what's all maintained in drm-misc grep for "drm-misc" in MAINTAINERS.
> > > +
> > > +* Larger features can be merged through drm-misc too, but in some cases
> > > +  (especially when there are cross-subsystem conflicts) it might make 
> > > sense to
> > > +  merge patches through a dedicated topic tree. The dim_ tooling has full
> > > +  support for them, if needed.
> > > +
> > > +* Any non-linear actions (backmerges, merging topic branches and sending 
> > > out
> > > +  pull requests) are only done by the official drm-misc maintainers (see
> > > +  MAINTAINERS, or ask #dri-devel), and not by committers. See the
> > > +  `examples section in dim <dim.html#examples>`_ for more info
> > > +
> > > +* All the x86, arm and arm64 DRM drivers need to still compile. To 
> > > simplify this
> > > +  we track defconfigs for all three platforms in the `drm-intel-rerere` 
> > > branch.
> > 
> > s/drm-intel-rerere/rerere-cache/ ?
> > 
> > > +
> > > +* The goal is to also pre-check everything with CI. Unfortunately 
> > > neither the
> > > +  arm side (using kernelci.org and generic i-g-t tests) nor the Intel 
> > > side
> > > +  (using Intel CI infrastructure and the full i-g-t suite) isn't yet 
> > > fully ready
> > 
> > s/isn't yet/is/
> > 
> > > +  for production.
> > > +
> > > +* No rebasing out mistakes, because this is a shared tree.
> > > +
> > > +* See also the extensive :ref:`committer-drm-intel`.
> > > +
> > > +Small Drivers
> > > +=============
> > > +
> > > +Small drivers, where a full tree is overkill, can be maintained in 
> > > drm-misc. For
> > > +now there are just a few drivers maintained in drm-misc, but we can 
> > > slowly add
> > 
> > We're beyond "just a few" at this point. Can you just remove this sentence?
> 
> I think that entire sentence can go. We figured out how to maintain small
> stuff in drm-misc, it seems to work rather well imo.

Maybe I should read stuff correctly first, or maybe coffee is broken
around?

Apologies for the amusement :-)
-Daniel

> -Daniel
> > 
> > With those,
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Sean Paul <[email protected]>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > +more to figure out how to make this scale. Slightly different rules 
> > > apply:
> > > +
> > > +* Small is measured in patches merged per kernel release. The occasional 
> > > big
> > > +  patch series is still acceptable if it's not a common thing (e.g. new 
> > > hw
> > > +  enabling once a year), and if the series is really big (more than 20 
> > > patches)
> > > +  it should probably be managed through a topic branch in drm-misc and 
> > > with a
> > > +  separate pull request to drm maintainer. dim_ supports this with the
> > > +  create-branch command. Everything that doesn't justify a topic branch 
> > > goes
> > > +  into the normal drm-misc branches directly.
> > > +
> > > +* Group maintainership is assumed, i.e. all regular contributors (not 
> > > just
> > > +  the primary maintainer) will get commit rights.
> > > +
> > > +* Since even a broken driver is more useful than no driver minimal review
> > > +  standards are a lot lower. The default should be some notes about what 
> > > could
> > > +  be improved in follow-up work and accepting patches by default. 
> > > Maintainer
> > > +  group for drivers can agree on stricter rules, especially when they 
> > > have a
> > > +  bigger user base that shouldn't suffer from regressions.
> > > +
> > > +* Minimal peer-review is also expected for drivers with just one 
> > > contributor,
> > > +  but obviously then only focuses on best practices for the interaction 
> > > with drm
> > > +  core and helpers. Plus a bit looking for common patterns in dealing 
> > > with the
> > > +  hardware, since display IP all has to handle the same issues in the 
> > > end. In
> > > +  most cases this will just along the lines of "Looks good, Ack".  
> > > drm-misc
> > > +  maintainers will help out with getting that review market going.
> > > +
> > > +* Best practice for review: When you have some suggestions and comments 
> > > for
> > > +  future work, please make sure you don't forget your Ack tag to unblock 
> > > the
> > > +  original patch. And if you think something really must be fixed before
> > > +  merging, please give a conditional Ack along the lines of "Fix
> > > +  $specific_thing, with that addressed, Ack". The goal is to always have 
> > > a clear
> > > +  and reasonable speedy path towards getting the patch merged. For 
> > > authors on
> > > +  the other side, just do the minimal rework and push the patch, and do 
> > > any
> > > +  more involved rework in follow-up work. This way lengthy review cycles 
> > > get
> > > +  avoided, which are a drag for both reviewer and author.
> > > +
> > > +Tooling
> > > +=======
> > > +
> > > +drm-misc git repositories are managed with dim_.
> > > +
> > > +.. _dim: dim.html
> > > diff --git a/committer-guidelines.rst b/committer-guidelines.rst
> > > index c0ed6d942aa7..46ac6164bcc3 100644
> > > --- a/committer-guidelines.rst
> > > +++ b/committer-guidelines.rst
> > > @@ -9,4 +9,5 @@ This document gathers together committer guidelines.
> > >  .. toctree::
> > >     :maxdepth: 2
> > >  
> > > +   committer-drm-misc
> > >     committer-drm-intel
> > > diff --git a/drm-misc.rst b/drm-misc.rst
> > > index a0217bc78f1d..832aeb33ffe9 100644
> > > --- a/drm-misc.rst
> > > +++ b/drm-misc.rst
> > > @@ -34,14 +34,6 @@ Branches
> > >  
> > >  See :ref:`drm-misc-repository`.
> > >  
> > > -Where Do I Apply My Patch?
> > > -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > -
> > > -Consult this handy flowchart to determine the best branch for your 
> > > patch. If in
> > > -doubt, apply to drm-misc-next or ask your favorite maintainer on IRC.
> > > -
> > > -.. image:: drm-misc-commit-flow.svg
> > > -
> > >  Merge Timeline
> > >  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >  
> > > @@ -52,85 +44,6 @@ release. There are no fast paths.
> > >  
> > >  .. include:: drm-misc-timeline.rst
> > >  
> > > -
> > > -Merge Criteria
> > > -==============
> > > -
> > > -Right now the only hard merge criteria are:
> > > -
> > > -* Patch is properly reviewed or at least Ack, i.e. don't just push your 
> > > own
> > > -  stuff directly. This rule holds even more for bugfix patches - it 
> > > would be
> > > -  embarrassing if the bugfix contains a small gotcha that review would 
> > > have
> > > -  caught.
> > > -
> > > -* drm-misc is for drm core (non-driver) patches, subsystem-wide 
> > > refactorings,
> > > -  and small trivial patches all over (including drivers). For a detailed 
> > > list of
> > > -  what's all maintained in drm-misc grep for "drm-misc" in MAINTAINERS.
> > > -
> > > -* Larger features can be merged through drm-misc too, but in some cases
> > > -  (especially when there are cross-subsystem conflicts) it might make 
> > > sense to
> > > -  merge patches through a dedicated topic tree. The dim_ tooling has full
> > > -  support for them, if needed.
> > > -
> > > -* Any non-linear actions (backmerges, merging topic branches and sending 
> > > out
> > > -  pull requests) are only done by the official drm-misc maintainers (see
> > > -  MAINTAINERS, or ask #dri-devel), and not by committers. See the
> > > -  `examples section in dim <dim.html#examples>`_ for more info
> > > -
> > > -* All the x86, arm and arm64 DRM drivers need to still compile. To 
> > > simplify this
> > > -  we track defconfigs for all three platforms in the `drm-intel-rerere` 
> > > branch.
> > > -
> > > -* The goal is to also pre-check everything with CI. Unfortunately 
> > > neither the
> > > -  arm side (using kernelci.org and generic i-g-t tests) nor the Intel 
> > > side
> > > -  (using Intel CI infrastructure and the full i-g-t suite) isn't yet 
> > > fully ready
> > > -  for production.
> > > -
> > > -* No rebasing out mistakes, because this is a shared tree.
> > > -
> > > -* See also the extensive `committer guidelines for drm-intel
> > > -  <drm-intel.html#committer-guidelines>`_.
> > > -
> > > -Small Drivers
> > > -=============
> > > -
> > > -Small drivers, where a full tree is overkill, can be maintained in 
> > > drm-misc. For
> > > -now there are just a few drivers maintained in drm-misc, but we can 
> > > slowly add
> > > -more to figure out how to make this scale. Slightly different rules 
> > > apply:
> > > -
> > > -* Small is measured in patches merged per kernel release. The occasional 
> > > big
> > > -  patch series is still acceptable if it's not a common thing (e.g. new 
> > > hw
> > > -  enabling once a year), and if the series is really big (more than 20 
> > > patches)
> > > -  it should probably be managed through a topic branch in drm-misc and 
> > > with a
> > > -  separate pull request to drm maintainer. dim_ supports this with the
> > > -  create-branch command. Everything that doesn't justify a topic branch 
> > > goes
> > > -  into the normal drm-misc branches directly.
> > > -
> > > -* Group maintainership is assumed, i.e. all regular contributors (not 
> > > just
> > > -  the primary maintainer) will get commit rights.
> > > -
> > > -* Since even a broken driver is more useful than no driver minimal review
> > > -  standards are a lot lower. The default should be some notes about what 
> > > could
> > > -  be improved in follow-up work and accepting patches by default. 
> > > Maintainer
> > > -  group for drivers can agree on stricter rules, especially when they 
> > > have a
> > > -  bigger user base that shouldn't suffer from regressions.
> > > -
> > > -* Minimal peer-review is also expected for drivers with just one 
> > > contributor,
> > > -  but obviously then only focuses on best practices for the interaction 
> > > with drm
> > > -  core and helpers. Plus a bit looking for common patterns in dealing 
> > > with the
> > > -  hardware, since display IP all has to handle the same issues in the 
> > > end. In
> > > -  most cases this will just along the lines of "Looks good, Ack".  
> > > drm-misc
> > > -  maintainers will help out with getting that review market going.
> > > -
> > > -* Best practice for review: When you have some suggestions and comments 
> > > for
> > > -  future work, please make sure you don't forget your Ack tag to unblock 
> > > the
> > > -  original patch. And if you think something really must be fixed before
> > > -  merging, please give a conditional Ack along the lines of "Fix
> > > -  $specific_thing, with that addressed, Ack". The goal is to always have 
> > > a clear
> > > -  and reasonable speedy path towards getting the patch merged. For 
> > > authors on
> > > -  the other side, just do the minimal rework and push the patch, and do 
> > > any
> > > -  more involved rework in follow-up work. This way lengthy review cycles 
> > > get
> > > -  avoided, which are a drag for both reviewer and author.
> > > -
> > >  Maintainer's Duties
> > >  ===================
> > >  
> > > @@ -174,11 +87,3 @@ Maintainers mostly provide services to keep drm-misc 
> > > running smoothly:
> > >  
> > >  * Take the blame when something goes wrong. Maintainers interface and 
> > > represent
> > >    the entire group of committers to the wider kernel community.
> > > -
> > > -Tooling
> > > -=======
> > > -
> > > -drm-misc git repositories are managed with dim_:
> > > -
> > > -.. _dim: dim.html
> > > -
> > > -- 
> > > 2.11.0
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dim-tools mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dim-tools
> > 
> > -- 
> > Sean Paul, Software Engineer, Google / Chromium OS
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dim-tools mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dim-tools

Reply via email to