On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 10:09 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 03:42:03PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > MAINTAINERS | 8 ++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > index 1814075c0e74..92f2bf91eec1 100644 > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > @@ -7405,6 +7405,9 @@ F: kernel/rcu/torture.c > > > > RCUTORTURE TEST FRAMEWORK > > M: "Paul E. McKenney" <[email protected]> > > +R: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> > > +R: Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]> > > +R: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]> > > L: [email protected] > > S: Supported > > T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git > > OK,.. so if we're going to do this can we talk about the syntax here. > > I would like to also use this for SCHED and PERF, but since both are > rather big I would like to be able to subdivide things. Now I could of > course go create many MAINTAINER sections, but that feels artificial. > > So I would like to be able to write: > > SCHEDULER: > ... > R: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> (kernel/sched/rt.c) > R: Juri Lelli <[email protected]> (kernel/sched/deadline.c) > > or something like that. And here I've already done concessions in that > the above is machine readable. Ideally I'd be able to say things like: > 'for sched and numa related things' add 'rik and mel'. > > Hmm, maybe we can look at the patch subject tag like: sched/numa or > sched/rt or sched/deadline etc.. instead of the files touched.
I think it's best to use separate sections. The parsing logic in get_maintainers is already ugly enough. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
