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;
Message-ID: <5ba33e10-7d75-9f9a-dfd6-c04608d230a4@gmx.de>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jan 2022 09:54:56 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.3.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add Helge as fbdev maintainer
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc:     linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
References: <YeG8ydoJNWWkGrTb@ls3530>
 <CAKMK7uGdJckdM+fg+576iJXsqzCOUg20etPBMwRLB9U7GcG01Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <c80ed72c-2eb4-16dd-a7ad-57e9dde59ba1@gmx.de>
 <CAKMK7uHVHn9apB6YYbLSwu+adEB2Fqp4FM0z582zf4F-v3_GnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <cf21018b-f231-7538-169e-2ad450643cbf@gmx.de>
 <97d49bca-f5f7-dba4-b62d-b6fcdd4276ac@suse.de> <87ee5659dt.fsf@intel.com>
 <4f1d6018-d74e-8e62-ea4d-0ca79c6bbbc5@gmx.de> <87a6ft5thv.fsf@intel.com>
From:   Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <87a6ft5thv.fsf@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On 1/18/22 09:38, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote:
>> On 1/17/22 22:40, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de> wrote:
>>>> Seems like few people read linux-fbdev these days.
>>>
>>> How much traffic is there to linux-fbdev that is *not* Cc'd to dri-dev=
el
>>> also?
>>
>> Doesn't seem like much traffic - which IMHO is OK for such a tree with
>> mostly just maintenance patches.
>>
>>> Do we still need a separate linux-fbdev mailing list at all?
>>
>> Yes. I want to have it seperate of dri-devel.
>> Actually I'd prefer to drop dri-devel from the list where patches
>> for fbdev are sent...
>
> Disagreed. If anything, this thread shows we can't have fbdev and drm in
> silos of their own.

Patches to fbdev usually don't affect DRM.
Patches which affect DRM needs to through to dri-devel.
In addition this would take the burden of the dri-developers to receive
unrelated fbdev driver updates and patches.

> Also, if the patches continue to get merged through drm-misc, they need
> to be sent to dri-devel.

Helge