Hi Mauro, On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57:28AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:36:20 +0300 Laurent Pinchart escreveu: > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 01:19:21PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > Document the basic policies of the media subsystem profile. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+sams...@kernel.org> > > > --- > > > > > > That's basically a modified version of: > > > https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/52999/ > > > > > > Applied to the new template > > > > > > Documentation/media/index.rst | 1 + > > > .../media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 140 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > MAINTAINERS | 1 + > > > 3 files changed, 142 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/media/index.rst b/Documentation/media/index.rst > > > index 0301c25ff887..ac94685b822a 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/media/index.rst > > > +++ b/Documentation/media/index.rst > > > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ Linux Media Subsystem Documentation > > > .. toctree:: > > > :maxdepth: 2 > > > > > > + maintainer-entry-profile > > > media_uapi > > > media_kapi > > > dvb-drivers/index > > > diff --git a/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > > b/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..81d3b0f9c36a > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > > @@ -0,0 +1,140 @@ > > > +Media Subsystem Profile > > > +======================= > > > + > > > +Overview > > > +-------- > > > + > > > +The media subsystem cover support for a variety of devices: stream > > > > s/cover/covers/ > > > > > +capture, analog and digital TV, cameras, remote controllers, HDMI CEC > > > +and media pipeline control. > > > + > > > +It covers, mainly, the contents of those directories: > > > + > > > + - drivers/media > > > + - drivers/staging/media > > > + - Documentation/media > > > + - include/media > > > + > > > +Both media userspace and Kernel APIs are documented and should be kept in > > > +sync with the API changes. It means that all patches that add new > > > +features to the subsystem should also bring changes to the corresponding > > > +API files. > > > + > > > +Also, patches for device drivers that changes the Open Firmware/Device > > > +Tree bindings should be reviewed by the Device Tree maintainers. > > > > You may want to make it clear that this covers bindings only, not driver > > code that parses the DT. I would just remove "for device drivers", as > > the rule should also apply to DT bindings documentation that is not > > driver-specific. > > > > > +Due to the size and wide scope of the media subsystem, media's > > > +maintainership model is to have sub-maintainers that have a broad > > > +knowledge of an specific aspect of the subsystem. It is a > > > +sub-maintainers task to review the patches, providing feedback to users > > > > s/sub-maintainers/sub-maintainer's/ > > > > > +if the patches are following the subsystem rules and are properly using > > > +the media internal and external APIs. > > > + > > > +Patches for the media subsystem should be sent to the media mailing list > > > +at linux-media@vger.kernel.org as plain text only e-mail. Emails with > > > +HTML will be automatically rejected by the mail server. There's no need > > > +to copy the maintainer or sub-maintainer(s). > > > > There's too much traffic on mailing lists for me to follow everything, I > > much prefer being CC'ed on patches. > > Well, by using patchwork, the best is to take a look on it at least for > the patches that you're interested. You could script something using > pwclient in order to make it easier. > > Anyway, not sure if the other sub-maintainers see the same way. From my side, > I prefer not to be c/c, as this is just more noise, as I just rely on > patchwork for media patches. What about changing this to: > > Patches for the media subsystem should be sent to the media mailing list > at linux-media@vger.kernel.org as plain text only e-mail. Emails with > HTML will be automatically rejected by the mail server. It could be > wise > to also copy the sub-maintainer(s).
That works for me. As this is really a personal preference, is there a way it could be encoded in MAINTAINERS in a per-person fashion ? Something that would allow you to opt-out from CC from linux-media (but possibly opt-in for other parts of the kernel), and allow me to opt-in for the drivers I maintain ? > > > +Media's workflow is heavily based on Patchwork, meaning that, once a > > > patch > > > +is submitted, it should appear at: > > > + > > > + - https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/list/ > > > + > > > +If it doesn't automatically appear there after a few minutes, then > > > +probably something got wrong on your submission. Please check if the > > > +email is in plain text only and if your emailer is not mangling with > > > +whitespaces before complaining or submit it again. > > > + > > > +Sub-maintainers > > > ++++++++++++++++ > > > + > > > +At the media subsystem, we have a group of senior developers that are > > > > How about "experienced" instead of "senior" ? Quality doesn't always > > come with age, neither for people nor wine :-) > > > > > +responsible for doing the code reviews at the drivers (called > > > +sub-maintainers), and another senior developer responsible for the > > > +subsystem as a hole. For core changes, whenever possible, multiple > > > +media (sub-)maintainers do the review. > > > + > > > +The sub-maintainers work on specific areas of the subsystem, as > > > +described below: > > > + > > > +Digital TV: > > > + Sean Young <s...@mess.org> > > > + > > > +HDMI CEC: > > > + Hans Verkuil <hverk...@xs4all.nl> > > > + > > > +Media controller drivers: > > > + Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com> > > > + > > > +Remote Controllers: > > > + Sean Young <s...@mess.org> > > > + > > > +Sensor drivers: > > > + Sakari Ailus <sakari.ai...@linux.intel.com> > > > + > > > +V4L2 drivers: > > > + Hans Verkuil <hverk...@xs4all.nl> > > > + > > > +Submit Checklist Addendum > > > +------------------------- > > > + > > > +There is a set of compliance tools at > > > https://git.linuxtv.org/v4l-utils.git/ > > > +that should be used in order to check if the drivers are properly > > > +implementing the media APIs. > > > + > > > +Those tests need to be passed before the patches go upstream. > > > > s/need to be passed/need to pass/ > > > > > + > > > +Also, please notice that we build the Kernel with:: > > > + > > > + make CF=-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__ CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y C=1 W=1 > > > CHECK=check_script > > > + > > > +Where the check script is:: > > > + > > > + #!/bin/bash > > > + /devel/smatch/smatch -p=kernel $@ >&2 > > > + /devel/sparse/sparse $@ >&2 > > > + > > > +Be sure to not introduce new warnings on your patches. > > > > While static analysers deliver value, I fear this is a high barrier to > > entry for new contributors. > > Will change this to: > > Be sure to not introduce new warnings on your patches without a > very good reason. > > Especially for new contributors, I really expect patches to not introduce > new warnings, as it is usually a lot more painful to fix them later than > to ask devs to do things right at the first place. I fully agree with the goal, but asking a drive-by contributor, who usually has to go through issues with sending patches through e-mail already, to install smatch and sparse and use them, is setting the bar high. I think automating those checks is the way to go. > > > + > > > +Key Cycle Dates > > > +--------------- > > > + > > > +New submissions can be sent at any time, but if they intend to hit the > > > +next merge window they should be sent before -rc5, and ideally stabilized > > > +in the linux-media branch by -rc6. > > > + > > > +Coding Style Addendum > > > +--------------------- > > > + > > > +Media development uses checkpatch on strict mode to verify the code > > > style, e. g.:: > > > + > > > + $ ./script/checkpatch.pl --strict > > > > But we still accept some warnings. I think this should be documented. > > True, but not sure if we should enter into too specific details here. > > What about adding something like: > > Please notice that the goal here is to improve code readability. On a > few > cases, checkpatch may actually point to something that would look > worse. > > So, you should use good send sense here, being prepared to justify any s/send sense/sense/ > coding style decision. "being prepared to justify" sounds a bit harsh :-) But the general message is good. > > Please also notice that, on some cases, when you fix one issue, you may > receive warnings about lines longer than 80 columns. It is fine to have > longer lines if this means that other warnings will be fixed by that. > > Yet, if you're having more than 80 columns on a line, please consider > simplifying the code - if too idented - or to use shorter names for > variables. That's already quite specific for my taste. We can keep it as-is if you think it's fine, but we clearly shouldn't go into more details. > > > + > > > +Review Cadence > > > +-------------- > > > + > > > +Provided that your patch is at https://patchwork.linuxtv.org, it should > > > +be sooner or later handled, so you don't need to re-submit a patch. > > > + > > > +Except for bug fixes, we don't usually add new patches to the development > > > +tree between -rc6 and the next -rc1. > > > + > > > +Please notice that the media subsystem is a high traffic one, so it > > > +could take a while for us to be able to review your patches. Feel free > > > +to ping if you don't get a feedback on a couple of weeks or to ask > > > > s/on a/in a/ > > > > > +other developers to publicly add Reviewed-by and, more importantly, > > > +Tested-by tags. > > > + > > > +Please notice that we expect a detailed description for Tested-by, > > > > s/notice/note/ > > > > > +identifying what boards were used at the test and what it was tested. > > > + > > > +Style Cleanup Patches > > > +--------------------- > > > + > > > +Style-cleanups are welcome when they come together with other changes > > > +at the files where the style changes will affect. > > > + > > > +We may accept pure standalone style-cleanups, but they should be grouped > > > +per directory. So, for example, if you're doing a cleanup at drivers > > > +under drivers/media, please send a single patch for all drivers under > > > +drivers/media/pci, another one for drivers/media/usb and so on. > > > > How about also stating that if the cleanup is low volume, a single patch > > for the whole subsystem is preferred ? I think that should actually be > > the rule, with a split to ease review only when the patch would be too > > big. > > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > index 7c62b45201d7..e7f44ec05a42 100644 > > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > @@ -10077,6 +10077,7 @@ W: https://linuxtv.org > > > Q: http://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-media/list/ > > > T: git git://linuxtv.org/media_tree.git > > > S: Maintained > > > +P: Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > > F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/ > > > F: Documentation/media/ > > > F: drivers/media/ > > > > I'm enclosing the diff against the past version. I'll send a final version > once the profiles patchset arrives upstream. > > diff --git a/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > b/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > index 81d3b0f9c36a..68d642abe2c1 100644 > --- a/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > +++ b/Documentation/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Media Subsystem Profile > Overview > -------- > > -The media subsystem cover support for a variety of devices: stream > +The media subsystem covers support for a variety of devices: stream > capture, analog and digital TV, cameras, remote controllers, HDMI CEC > and media pipeline control. > > @@ -20,20 +20,20 @@ sync with the API changes. It means that all patches that > add new > features to the subsystem should also bring changes to the corresponding > API files. > > -Also, patches for device drivers that changes the Open Firmware/Device > -Tree bindings should be reviewed by the Device Tree maintainers. > +Also, patches that changes the Open Firmware/Device Tree bindings should > +also be reviewed by the Device Tree maintainers. > > Due to the size and wide scope of the media subsystem, media's > maintainership model is to have sub-maintainers that have a broad > knowledge of an specific aspect of the subsystem. It is a > -sub-maintainers task to review the patches, providing feedback to users > +sub-maintainer's task to review the patches, providing feedback to users > if the patches are following the subsystem rules and are properly using > the media internal and external APIs. > > Patches for the media subsystem should be sent to the media mailing list > at linux-media@vger.kernel.org as plain text only e-mail. Emails with > -HTML will be automatically rejected by the mail server. There's no need > -to copy the maintainer or sub-maintainer(s). > +HTML will be automatically rejected by the mail server. It could be wise > +to also copy the sub-maintainer(s). > > Media's workflow is heavily based on Patchwork, meaning that, once a patch > is submitted, it should appear at: > @@ -48,8 +48,8 @@ whitespaces before complaining or submit it again. > Sub-maintainers > +++++++++++++++ > > -At the media subsystem, we have a group of senior developers that are > -responsible for doing the code reviews at the drivers (called > +At the media subsystem, we have a group of experienced developers that > +are responsible for doing the code reviews at the drivers (called > sub-maintainers), and another senior developer responsible for the > subsystem as a hole. For core changes, whenever possible, multiple > media (sub-)maintainers do the review. > @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ There is a set of compliance tools at > https://git.linuxtv.org/v4l-utils.git/ > that should be used in order to check if the drivers are properly > implementing the media APIs. > > -Those tests need to be passed before the patches go upstream. > +Those tests need to pass before the patches go upstream. > > Also, please notice that we build the Kernel with:: > > @@ -94,7 +94,8 @@ Where the check script is:: > /devel/smatch/smatch -p=kernel $@ >&2 > /devel/sparse/sparse $@ >&2 > > -Be sure to not introduce new warnings on your patches. > +Be sure to not introduce new warnings on your patches without a > +very good reason. > > Key Cycle Dates > --------------- > @@ -110,6 +111,20 @@ Media development uses checkpatch on strict mode to > verify the code style, e. g. > > $ ./script/checkpatch.pl --strict > > +Please notice that the goal here is to improve code readability. On a few > +cases, checkpatch may actually point to something that would look worse. > + > +So, you should use good send sense here, being prepared to justify any > +coding style decision. > + > +Please also notice that, on some cases, when you fix one issue, you may > +receive warnings about lines longer than 80 columns. It is fine to have > +longer lines if this means that other warnings will be fixed by that. > + > +Yet, if you're having more than 80 columns on a line, please consider > +simplifying the code - if too idented - or to use shorter names for > +variables. > + > Review Cadence > -------------- > > @@ -121,11 +136,11 @@ tree between -rc6 and the next -rc1. > > Please notice that the media subsystem is a high traffic one, so it > could take a while for us to be able to review your patches. Feel free > -to ping if you don't get a feedback on a couple of weeks or to ask > +to ping if you don't get a feedback in a couple of weeks or to ask > other developers to publicly add Reviewed-by and, more importantly, > Tested-by tags. > > -Please notice that we expect a detailed description for Tested-by, > +Please note that we expect a detailed description for Tested-by, > identifying what boards were used at the test and what it was tested. > > Style Cleanup Patches > @@ -134,7 +149,9 @@ Style Cleanup Patches > Style-cleanups are welcome when they come together with other changes > at the files where the style changes will affect. > > -We may accept pure standalone style-cleanups, but they should be grouped > -per directory. So, for example, if you're doing a cleanup at drivers > -under drivers/media, please send a single patch for all drivers under > -drivers/media/pci, another one for drivers/media/usb and so on. > +We may accept pure standalone style-cleanups, but they should ideally > +be one patch for the hole subsystem (if the cleanup is low volume), s/hole/whole/ > +or at least be grouped per directory. So, for example, if you're doing > +big cleanup changes at drivers under drivers/media, please send a single > +patch for all drivers under drivers/media/pci, another one for > +drivers/media/usb and so on. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
