[PATCH v2] Documentation: RISC-V: patch-acceptance: mention patchwork's role

* [PATCH v2] Documentation: RISC-V: patch-acceptance: mention patchwork's role
@ 2023-06-06  6:59 Conor Dooley
  2023-06-13 13:00 ` Björn Töpel
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Conor Dooley @ 2023-06-06  6:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: palmer
  Cc: conor, conor.dooley, Björn Töpel, Paul Walmsley,
	Jonathan Corbet, linux-riscv, linux-doc

Palmer suggested at some point, not sure if it was in one of the
weekly linux-riscv syncs, or a conversation at FOSDEM, that we
should document the role of the automation running on our patchwork
instance plays in patch acceptance.

Add a short note to the patch-acceptance document to that end.

Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
---
I was also not sure if this was the correct doc for this, or whether a
process/maintainer-riscv.rst file was better suited. There's clearly no
rush on this though so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Changes in v2:
- mention that riscv/master is now also a possible application target.

CC: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>
CC: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
CC: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>
CC: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
CC: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
CC: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
---
 Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
index 07d5a5623e2a..634aa222b410 100644
--- a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
+++ b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
@@ -16,6 +16,24 @@ tested code over experimental code.  We wish to extend these same
 principles to the RISC-V-related code that will be accepted for
 inclusion in the kernel.
 
+Patchwork
+---------
+
+RISC-V has a patchwork instance, where the status of patches can be checked:
+
+  https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-riscv/list/
+
+If your patch does not appear in the default view, the RISC-V maintainers have
+likely either requested changes, or expect it to be applied to another tree.
+
+Automation runs against this patchwork instance, building/testing patches as
+they arrive. The automation applies patches against the current HEAD of the
+RISC-V `for-next` and `fixes` branches, depending on whether the patch has been
+detected as a fix. Failing those, it will use the RISC-V `master` branch.
+The exact commit to which a series has been applied will be noted on patchwork.
+Patches for which any of the checks fail are unlikely to be applied and in most
+cases will need to be resubmitted.
+
 Submit Checklist Addendum
 -------------------------
 We'll only accept patches for new modules or extensions if the
-- 
2.39.2


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread