Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-138456-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 12/12] mm: page_frag: update documentation and
 maintainer for page_frag
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>, Jakub Kicinski
	<kuba@kernel.org>
CC: <davem@davemloft.net>, <pabeni@redhat.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Andrew
 Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	<linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240407130850.19625-1-linyunsheng@huawei.com>
 <20240407130850.19625-13-linyunsheng@huawei.com>
 <b5c5866e626f6c90657a32b5e9adff724d5896db.camel@gmail.com>
 <c1f5a78a-3040-0cc7-f113-d5ec82c6010f@huawei.com>
 <CAKgT0UfZBGEVJa1O7cdNt6zy_EEPoGo=aW6ugRKy8a44qg0j8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <09d7d59b-9da3-52f7-b039-acd0344c88c8@huawei.com>
 <20240409062504.26cfcdde@kernel.org>
 <CAKgT0UfqDRxhUyfQhwsDrRhQmCw4qNw_7Jwq+xN1Z4f6_1Bthg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <dea82ac3-65fc-c941-685f-9d4655aa4a52@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 19:56:10 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.2.0
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKgT0UfqDRxhUyfQhwsDrRhQmCw4qNw_7Jwq+xN1Z4f6_1Bthg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 2024/4/9 23:11, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 6:25 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 15:59:58 +0800 Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>>>> Just to be clear this isn't an Ack, but if you are going to list
>>>> maintainers for this my name should be on the list so this is the
>>>> preferred format. There are still some things to be cleaned up in this
>>>> patch.
>>>
>>> Sure, I was talking about "Alexander seems to be the orginal author for
>>> page_frag, we can add him to the MAINTAINERS later if we have an ack from
>>> him." in the commit log.
>>
>> Do we have to have a MAINTAINERS entry for every 1000 lines of code?

Do we have something like rule or guidance against that?
Looking at the entry in MAINTAINERS, it seems quite normal to me,
I thouht it is generally encourage someone with willing and ability
to be a maintainer/reviewer.

Considering you have refused adding me as the reviewer of page_pool
despite the support from two maintainers of page_pool, for the season
of something like below:
'page pool is increasingly central to the whole networking stack.
The bar for "ownership" is getting higher and higher..'

I think I might need a second opinion here.

>> It really feels forced :/

I am not a native english speaker here, I would rather not comment
on the 'forced' part here and focus more on the technical disscusion.

> 
> I don't disagree. However, if nothing else I think it gets used as a
> part of get_maintainers.pl that tells you who to email about changes
> doesn't it? It might make sense in my case since I am still
> maintaining it using my gmail account, but I think the commits for
> that were mostly from my Intel account weren't they? So if nothing
> else it might be a way to provide a trail of breadcrumbs on how to
> find a maintainer who changed employers..

+1.
I generally pay more attention to the patch that is to'ed or cc'ed
to my email when I am overloaded with other work.

> .
>