Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@collabora.com>
To:     devicetree@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@collabora.com
Subject: Rule for bridge yaml dt binding maintainers?
Date:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:19:24 +0300
Message-ID: <87d082jtfn.fsf@collabora.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

I got confused while doing the txt -> yaml conversion at [1] and 
it's still not clear to me who should be added in the 
"maintainers" field.  Clearly not the maintainers as returned by 
get_maintainer.pl. :)

Rob mentioned that "owners" should be manintainers but I also have 
trouble picking the persons who should be owners / yaml 
maintainers.

Looking at the completed bridge conversions in the latest 
linux-next, I couldn't find a rule and the majority of bindings 
are still txt: 

$ find ./devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/ -name *txt | wc -l
23
$ find ./devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/ -name *yaml | wc -l
5

So my questions are:
1. Is there a general rule for assigning yaml file 
owners/maintainers?

2. Is this vagueness specific to the bridge dt bindings only?

3. Who should step up and maintain these bindings? Original/new 
authors, SoC, bridge, DRM maintainers etc.?

It would be useful to have a rule to make it easier to do these 
conversions. We (Collabora) are considering doing the conversion 
work.

Thank you,
Adrian

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11493009/