BPF Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
	ksummit <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
	Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 3/3] libnvdimm, MAINTAINERS: Maintainer Entry Profile
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 05:18:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4jPpxS4wxNO-e1pSHdQpKo5=V0YwD1CHqR61g8zmECKfw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190913114849.GP20699@kadam>

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 4:49 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 01:09:37AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:11:29 -0600
> > Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> >
> > > On 9/11/19 12:43 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I kind of hate all this extra documentation because now everyone thinks
> > > > they can invent new hoops to jump through.
> > >
> > > FWIW, I completely agree with Dan (Carpenter) here. I absolutely
> > > dislike having these kinds of files, and with subsystems imposing weird
> > > restrictions on style (like the quoted example, yuck).
> > >
> > > Additionally, it would seem saner to standardize rules around when
> > > code is expected to hit the maintainers hands for kernel releases. Both
> > > yours and Martins deals with that, there really shouldn't be the need
> > > to have this specified in detail per sub-system.
> >
> > This sort of objection came up at the maintainers summit yesterday; the
> > consensus was that, while we might not like subsystem-specific rules, they
> > do currently exist and we're just documenting reality.  To paraphrase
> > Phillip K. Dick, reality is that which, when you refuse to document it,
> > doesn't go away.
>
> There aren't that many subsystem rules.  The big exception is
> networking, with the comment style and reverse Chrismas tree
> declarations.  Also you have to label which git tree the patch applies
> to like [net] or [net-next].
>
> It used to be that infiniband used "sizeof foo" instead of sizeof(foo)
> but now there is a new maintainer.
>
> There is one subsystem which where the maintainer will capitalize your
> patch prefix and complain.  There are others where they will silently
> change it to lower case.  (Maybe that has changed in recent years).
>
> There is one subsystem where the maintainer is super strict rules that
> you can't use "I" or "we" in the commit message.  So you can't say "I
> noticed a bug while reviewing", you have to say "The code has a bug".
>
> Some maintainers have rules about what you can put in the declaration
> block.  No kmalloc() in the declarations is a common rule.
> "struct foo *p = kmalloc();".
>
> Some people (I do) have strict rules for error handling, but most won't
> complain unless the error handling has bugs.
>
> The bpf people want you to put [bpf] or [bpf-next] in the subject.
> Everyone just guesses, and uneducated guesses are worse than leaving it
> blank, but that's just my opinion.
>
> > So I'm expecting to take this kind of stuff into Documentation/.  My own
> > personal hope is that it can maybe serve to shame some of these "local
> > quirks" out of existence.  The evidence from this brief discussion suggests
> > that this might indeed happen.
>
> I don't think it's shaming, I think it's validating.  Everyone just
> insists that since it's written in the Book of Rules then it's our fault
> for not reading it.  It's like those EULA things where there is more
> text than anyone can physically read in a life time.
>
> And the documentation doesn't help.  For example, I knew people's rules
> about capitalizing the subject but I'd just forget.  I say that if you
> can't be bothered to add it to checkpatch then it means you don't really
> care that strongly.

True, can someone with better perl skills than me take a shot at a
rule for checkpatch to catch the capitalization preference based on
the subsystem being touched, or otherwise agree that if a maintainer
has a changelog capitalization preference they just silently fix it up
at application time and not waste time pointing out something so
trivial? For example, I notice Linus likes "-" instead of "*" for
bullet lists in changelogs he just fixes it up silently if I forget.

  reply index

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <156821692280.2951081.18036584954940423225.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com>
     [not found] ` <156821693963.2951081.11214256396118531359.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com>
2019-09-11 18:43   ` Dan Carpenter
2019-09-11 22:11     ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-12  7:41       ` Dan Williams
2019-09-12  8:24         ` Miguel Ojeda
2019-09-12 10:18           ` Joe Perches
2019-09-12 14:42             ` Miguel Ojeda
2019-09-13  7:09       ` Jonathan Corbet
2019-09-13 11:48         ` Dan Carpenter
2019-09-13 12:18           ` Dan Williams [this message]
2019-09-13 15:00           ` Randy Dunlap
2019-09-13 15:46             ` Rob Herring
2019-09-13 16:42               ` Joe Perches
2019-09-13 19:32                 ` Rob Herring
2019-09-13 17:57             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-09-16 12:42           ` Jani Nikula
2019-09-17 16:16           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-09-17 21:59             ` Dan Williams
2019-09-13 21:44       ` Martin K. Petersen
2019-09-16  7:01         ` Dan Carpenter
2019-09-16 17:08           ` Martin K. Petersen
2019-09-16 17:15             ` Mark Brown
2019-09-13  2:11     ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2019-09-13  5:00       ` Greg KH

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAPcyv4jPpxS4wxNO-e1pSHdQpKo5=V0YwD1CHqR61g8zmECKfw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
    --cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    --cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

BPF Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/0 bpf/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 bpf bpf/ https://lore.kernel.org/bpf \
		bpf@vger.kernel.org bpf@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index bpf

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.bpf


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox