From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> To: <palmer@dabbelt.com> Cc: conor@kernel.org, conor.dooley@microchip.com, "Björn Töpel" <bjorn@kernel.org>, "Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, "Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v1] Documentation: RISC-V: patch-acceptance: mention patchwork's role Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 14:50:21 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20230511-equation-decline-56b638ff9440@wendy> (raw) 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> --- The bit about fixes being applied to riscv/fixes is not actually correct, it's actually linux-next/pending-fixes. We've not had issues with the fixes branch being broken in a while, but I switched it over to pending-fixes due to the KVM breakage. I'll swap back to match the documentation I'm adding. 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)_/¯ 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 1d1fb885326b..76ec57626043 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. 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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> To: <palmer@dabbelt.com> Cc: conor@kernel.org, conor.dooley@microchip.com, "Björn Töpel" <bjorn@kernel.org>, "Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, "Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v1] Documentation: RISC-V: patch-acceptance: mention patchwork's role Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 14:50:21 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20230511-equation-decline-56b638ff9440@wendy> (raw) 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> --- The bit about fixes being applied to riscv/fixes is not actually correct, it's actually linux-next/pending-fixes. We've not had issues with the fixes branch being broken in a while, but I switched it over to pending-fixes due to the KVM breakage. I'll swap back to match the documentation I'm adding. 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)_/¯ 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 1d1fb885326b..76ec57626043 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. 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 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next reply other threads:[~2023-05-11 13:51 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-05-11 13:50 Conor Dooley [this message] 2023-05-11 13:50 ` [PATCH v1] Documentation: RISC-V: patch-acceptance: mention patchwork's role Conor Dooley
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly 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=20230511-equation-decline-56b638ff9440@wendy \ --to=conor.dooley@microchip.com \ --cc=bjorn@kernel.org \ --cc=conor@kernel.org \ --cc=corbet@lwn.net \ --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \ --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.