[PATCH 1/3] MAINTAINERS: soc: reference maintainer profile

[PATCH 1/3] MAINTAINERS: soc: reference maintainer profile

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Mention the SoC maintainer profile in P: entry.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 MAINTAINERS | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index f646ba70a01b..b61289fa7891 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -1558,6 +1558,7 @@ M:	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
 M:	soc@kernel.org
 L:	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
 S:	Maintained
+P:	Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst
 C:	irc://irc.libera.chat/armlinux
 T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/soc/soc.git
 F:	Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH 2/3] Documentation/process: maintainer-soc: add clean platforms profile

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Some SoC platforms require that commits must not bring any new
dtbs_check warnings.  Maintainers of such platforms usually have some
automation set, so any new warning will be spotted sooner or later.
Worst case: they run the tests themselves.  Document requirements for
such platforms, so contributors can expect their patches being dropped
or ignored, if they bring new warnings for existing boards.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 .../process/maintainer-handbooks.rst          |  1 +
 .../process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst      | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
 MAINTAINERS                                   |  2 +-
 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst

diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst
index 9992bfd7eaa3..976391cec528 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst
@@ -17,5 +17,6 @@ Contents:
 
    maintainer-netdev
    maintainer-soc
+   maintainer-soc-clean-dts
    maintainer-tip
    maintainer-kvm-x86
diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..87feeb5543ff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+=============================
+SoC Platforms with Strict DTS
+=============================
+
+Overview
+--------
+
+SoC platforms or subarchitectures follow all the rules from
+Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst.  However platforms referencing this
+document impose additional requirements listed below.
+
+Strict DTS DT schema compliance
+-------------------------------
+None of the changes to the SoC platform Devicetree sources (DTS files) can
+bring new ``make dtbs_check W=1`` warnings.  The platform maintainers have
+automation in place which should point out any new warnings.
+
+If a commit introducing new warning gets accepted somehow, the resulting issues
+shall be fixed in reasonable time (e.g. within one release) or the commit
+reverted.
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index b61289fa7891..7405fb6e38c3 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -1561,7 +1561,7 @@ S:	Maintained
 P:	Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst
 C:	irc://irc.libera.chat/armlinux
 T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/soc/soc.git
-F:	Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst
+F:	Documentation/process/maintainer-soc*.rst
 F:	arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
 F:	arch/arm64/boot/dts/Makefile
 
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH 3/3] MAINTAINER: samsung: document dtbs_check requirement for Samsung

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Samsung ARM/ARM64 SoCs (including legacy S3C64xx and S5PV210) are also
expected not to bring any new dtbs_check warnings.  In fact this have
been already enforced and tested since few release.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>

---

Previous idea was here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230712084131.127982-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org/
---
 MAINTAINERS | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 7405fb6e38c3..9a539af4d775 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -2632,6 +2632,7 @@ R:	Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>
 L:	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
 L:	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
 S:	Maintained
+P:	Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
 Q:	https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-samsung-soc/list/
 B:	mailto:linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
 C:	irc://irc.libera.chat/linux-exynos
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Documentation/process: maintainer-soc: add clean platforms profile

[David Sterba]

On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:47:24AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> +Overview
> +--------
> +
> +SoC platforms or subarchitectures follow all the rules from
> +Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst.  However platforms referencing this

Just a drive by comment, references to highly relevant documents should
be clickable, so :doc:`Documentation/process/maintainer-soc` , with
exceptions like if the document has been referenced already.

Re: [PATCH 1/3] MAINTAINERS: soc: reference maintainer profile

[Randy Dunlap]

On 7/14/23 01:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Mention the SoC maintainer profile in P: entry.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>

Yes, please.

Reviewed-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>

> ---
>  MAINTAINERS | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index f646ba70a01b..b61289fa7891 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -1558,6 +1558,7 @@ M:	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
>  M:	soc@kernel.org
>  L:	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
>  S:	Maintained
> +P:	Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst
>  C:	irc://irc.libera.chat/armlinux
>  T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/soc/soc.git
>  F:	Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst

-- 
~Randy

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Documentation/process: maintainer-soc: add clean platforms profile

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 14/07/2023 15:59, David Sterba wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:47:24AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> +Overview
>> +--------
>> +
>> +SoC platforms or subarchitectures follow all the rules from
>> +Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst.  However platforms referencing this
> 
> Just a drive by comment, references to highly relevant documents should
> be clickable, so :doc:`Documentation/process/maintainer-soc` , with
> exceptions like if the document has been referenced already.

Is it needed though? The link is anyway detected by sphinx.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Documentation/process: maintainer-soc: add clean platforms profile

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 14/07/2023 14:50, Conor Dooley wrote:
> Hey Krzysztof,
> 
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:47:24AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Some SoC platforms require that commits must not bring any new
>> dtbs_check warnings.  Maintainers of such platforms usually have some
>> automation set, so any new warning will be spotted sooner or later.
>> Worst case: they run the tests themselves.  Document requirements for
>> such platforms, so contributors can expect their patches being dropped
>> or ignored, if they bring new warnings for existing boards.
> 
> Definitely a more scalable approach than your previous version!
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>  .../process/maintainer-handbooks.rst          |  1 +
>>  .../process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst      | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
>>  MAINTAINERS                                   |  2 +-
>>  3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst
>> index 9992bfd7eaa3..976391cec528 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst
>> @@ -17,5 +17,6 @@ Contents:
>>  
>>     maintainer-netdev
>>     maintainer-soc
>> +   maintainer-soc-clean-dts
>>     maintainer-tip
>>     maintainer-kvm-x86
>> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..87feeb5543ff
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
>> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>> +
>> +=============================
>> +SoC Platforms with Strict DTS
> 
> I don't think that this title makes much sense, it feels like it has
> been truncated. Perhaps add "Requirements" to the end?

OK, but maybe better then

SoC Platforms with DTS Compliance Requirements
?

> 
>> +=============================
>> +
>> +Overview
>> +--------
>> +
>> +SoC platforms or subarchitectures follow all the rules from
> 
> s/follow/should follow/?

Ack

> 
>> +Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst.  However platforms referencing this
>> +document impose additional requirements listed below.
>> +
>> +Strict DTS DT schema compliance
>> +-------------------------------
> Should there be a blank line here to match the other section headings?

Ack

> Also, to match the title case you used elsewhere, "Schema Compliance"?

Ack

> 
>> +None of the changes to the SoC platform Devicetree sources (DTS files) can
>> +bring new ``make dtbs_check W=1`` warnings.  The platform maintainers have
> 
> Nitpickery again, but perhaps the first sentence here would read better as
> "No changes to the SoC platform Devicetree sources (DTS files) should
> introduce new ``make dtbs_check W=1`` warnings."?

Ack

> 
>> +automation in place which should point out any new warnings.
>> +
>> +If a commit introducing new warning gets accepted somehow, the resulting issues
>> +shall be fixed in reasonable time (e.g. within one release) or the commit
>> +reverted.
> 
> It is loosely related, but I was wondering if we should also try to push
> people that change the platform's bindings to update the DTS also, so
> that binding changes do not introduce W=1 complaints?

Makes sense, we could add such rule to Devicetree maintainer profile.
Anyway enforcing it relies on Rob's bot reporting the warnings, which
seems silent recently.

> For many bindings the platform entry in MAINTAINERS does not cover them,
> but things like the arm64 Apple stuff mention them specifically & others
> will get coverage due to regexes.
> 
> Anyway, nitpickery aside I like this approach.
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> 


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Documentation/process: maintainer-soc: add clean platforms profile

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17/07/2023 09:51, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 14/07/2023 15:59, David Sterba wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:47:24AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> +Overview
>>> +--------
>>> +
>>> +SoC platforms or subarchitectures follow all the rules from
>>> +Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst.  However platforms referencing this
>>
>> Just a drive by comment, references to highly relevant documents should
>> be clickable, so :doc:`Documentation/process/maintainer-soc` , with
>> exceptions like if the document has been referenced already.
> 
> Is it needed though? The link is anyway detected by sphinx.

And it does not work:

maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst:10: WARNING: unknown document:
Documentation/process/maintainer-soc

I also tried:
maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst:10: WARNING: unknown document:
Documentation/process/maintainer-soc.rst


Best regards,
Krzysztof