Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755320AbdLGNKg (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 08:10:36 -0500 Received: from forward106o.mail.yandex.net ([37.140.190.187]:48586 "EHLO forward106o.mail.yandex.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755284AbdLGNKb (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 08:10:31 -0500 Authentication-Results: smtp4o.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@flygoat.com Message-ID: <1512652210.13996.10.camel@flygoat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] About MIPS/Loongson maintainance From: Jiaxun Yang To: James Hogan , Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Huacai Chen , Linus Torvalds , Stephen Rothwell , Ralf Baechle , Rui Wang , Binbin Zhou , Ce Sun , Yao Wang , Liangliang Huang , Fuxin Zhang , Zhangjin Wu , r@hev.cc, zhoubb.aaron@gmail.com, huanglllzu@163.com, 513434146@qq.com, 1393699660@qq.com, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 21:10:10 +0800 In-Reply-To: <20171207110549.GM27409@jhogan-linux.mipstec.com> References: <1512628268-18357-1-git-send-email-chenhc@lemote.com> <20171207065759.GC19722@kroah.com> <20171207110549.GM27409@jhogan-linux.mipstec.com> X-Priority: 1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.2-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3545 Lines: 89 On 2017-12-07 Thu 11:05 +0000,James Hogan Wrote: > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 07:57:59AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 02:31:07PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: > > > Hi, Linus, Stephen, Greg, Ralf and James, > > > > > > We are kernel developers from Lemote Inc. and Loongson community. > > > We > > > have already made some contributions in Linux kernel, but we hope > > > we > > > can do more works. > > > > > > Of course Loongson is a sub-arch in MIPS, but linux-mips > > > community is > > > so inactive (Maybe maintainers are too busy?) that too many > > > patches ( > > > Not only for Loongson, but also for other sub-archs) were delayed > > > for > > > a long time. So we are seeking a more efficient way to make > > > Loongson > > > patches be merged in upstream. > > > > > > Now we have a github organization for collaboration: > > > https://github.com/linux-loongson/linux-loongson.git > > > > Ick, why not get a kernel.org account for your git tree? > > > > > We don't want to replace linux-mips, we just want to find a way > > > to co- > > > operate with linux-mips. So we will still use the maillist and > > > patchwork > > > of linux-mips, but we hope we can send pull requests from our > > > github to > > > linux-next and linux-mainline by ourselves (if there is no > > > objections > > > to our patches from linux-mips community). > > > > What does the mips maintainers think about this? > > > > Odds are a linux-next tree is fine, but they probably want to merge > > the > > trees into their larger mips one for the pulls to Linus, much like > > the > > arm-core tree works, right? > > I'm not officially a MIPS maintainer but I have donned the hat > unofficially a few times lately, so FWIW I think the Loongson stuff > should go through the MIPS tree, since it so often touches core > architecture code. Yes we are always touching architecture code. For that part, we'll still submit our patches to linux-mips tree. But we're also maintaining many platform code under /arch/mips/loongson64 and also platform drivers such as hwmon, cpufreq and YeeLoong Laptop driver I'm trying to submit recently. For that part, make a pull request might be more efficient than apply patches to linux-mips for many times. Just as what arm architecture did. We would like to reduce Ralf's work load. Not bypassing him. > Clearly there have been some issues getting MIPS stuff applied > recently, > but I think the right approach long-term is to try and improve things > there rather than bypass the MIPS tree altogether. > > I believe assigning a co-maintainer would help spread Ralf's load, > even > if that primarily means helping review patches (something we can all > help with tbh), and being able to ack patches which touch MIPS but > need > to go through other subsystem trees (e.g. I know David Daney was > waiting > on acks for the MIPS portions of the Octeon III ethernet driver > series). I agree with that. Ralf really need help. > I'm willing to take on that role if Ralf is okay with it. I'm already > trying to keep track of fixes and spend more time reviewing patches > on > the list, but the more who can help out the better. > > The question of who applies patches can't be avoided though. It would > clearly suck to have all the review in the world but still end up > with > the co-maintainer having to take the reigns at the last minute to get > those important fixes in, and then have no time to apply anything > substantial for the merge window. > > Cheers > James -- Jiaxun Yang