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: <4f65fdd9-4b73-ca83-cf6e-c60c7ccd6558@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:33:00 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.4.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add Helge as fbdev maintainer
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
        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,
        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>
 <5ba33e10-7d75-9f9a-dfd6-c04608d230a4@gmx.de>
From:   Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <5ba33e10-7d75-9f9a-dfd6-c04608d230a4@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 1/18/22 09:54, Helge Deller wrote:
> 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-devel
>>>> 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 for fbdev drivers don't usually affect DRM but that's not the
case for patches to fbdev core and fbcon as you and others mentioned.

> Patches which affect DRM needs to through to dri-devel.

And how would people know which ones need to go through dri-devel ? Are
you planning to add another entry to MAINTAINERS for fbdev core/fbcon ?

> In addition this would take the burden of the dri-developers to receive
> unrelated fbdev driver updates and patches.
>

In my opinion having fbdev patches in the dri-devel mailing list isn't
a big burden, but rather getting people to review and push say patches.

Since you are volunteering for the latter, that should improve things.

I still fail to see the benefit of doing that split, same for having a
separate fbdev tree. Using drm-misc only have advantages, among other
things providing redundancy in cases that a maintainer isn't available
for a period of time.

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Linux Engineering
Red Hat