From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04470C4CEC8 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:34:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C62E6208E4 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:34:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C62E6208E4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=perches.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D92B1202E6DE4; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: None (no SPF record) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=216.40.44.180; helo=smtprelay.hostedemail.com; envelope-from=joe@perches.com; receiver=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0180.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 491BC202E2918 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E876C18224D65; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:34:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-HE-Tag: room66_4419114b8213b X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2754 Received: from XPS-9350.home (unknown [47.151.152.152]) (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:34:27 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <44c08faf43fa77fb271f8dbb579079fb09007716.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 0/3] Maintainer Entry Profiles From: Joe Perches To: Bart Van Assche , "Martin K. Petersen" , Dan Williams Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:34:26 -0700 In-Reply-To: <6fe45562-9493-25cf-afdb-6c0e702a49b4@acm.org> References: <156821692280.2951081.18036584954940423225.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <6fe45562-9493-25cf-afdb-6c0e702a49b4@acm.org> User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.1-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steve French , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Dmitry Vyukov , "Tobin C. Harding" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 14:31 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 9/11/19 5:40 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > * Do not use custom To: and Cc: for individual patches. We want to see the > > whole series, even patches that potentially need to go through a different > > subsystem tree. That's not currently feasible when cc'ing any vger.kernel.org list as those lists have a maximum email header size and patches that span multiple subsystems can have very long to: and cc: lists. > > * The patch must compile without warnings (make C=1 CF="-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__") > > and does not incur any zeroday test robot complaints. > > How about adding W=1 to that make command? That's rather too compiler version dependent and new warnings frequently get introduced by new compiler versions. > How about existing drivers that trigger tons of endianness warnings, > e.g. qla2xxx? How about requiring that no new warnings are introduced? Adding a sparse clean C=2 requirement might be useful. > > * The patch must have a commit message that describes, comprehensively and in > > plain English, what the patch does. > > How about making this requirement more detailed and requiring that not > only what has been changed is document but also why that change has been > made? I believe the "why" is rather more important than the "how" and should be the primary thing described in the commit message. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm