Re: [PATCH phy-next 22/22] MAINTAINERS: add regex for linux-phy

[Vladimir Oltean]

Hello Konrad,

On Thu, Mar 05, 2026 at 09:39:35AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index 55af015174a5..bdfa47d9c774 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -10713,6 +10713,7 @@ F:    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/
> >  F:   drivers/phy/
> >  F:   include/dt-bindings/phy/
> >  F:   include/linux/phy/
> > +K:   \b(devm_)?(of_)?phy_(create|destroy|init|exit|reset|power_(on|off)|configure|validate|calibrate|(get|set)_(mode|media|speed|bus_width|drvdata)|get_max_link_rate|pm_runtime_(get|put)|notify_(connect|disconnect|state)|get|put|optional_get|provider_(un)?register|simple_xlate|(create|remove)_lookup)\b|(struct\s+)?phy(_ops|_attrs|_lookup|_provider)?\b|linux/phy/phy\.h|phy-props\.h|phy-provider\.h
> 
> Would looking for the devm/of_phy_ prefix followed by an open parentheses
> not suffice for the 'has function call' case, instead of listing all
> currently present exported functions?

This would maybe work when you run ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl on a file.
But I would like it to have good coverage on individual patches too. And
since the devm/of_phy prefix only matches when you "get" the PHY, not
"use" it, my fear is we would still be missing out on the most important
part of the patches.

> 
> My worry is that this approach is overbuilt and absolutely no one will
> remember to update it

I think I can add a test in the patch build automation that correlates
function and struct names from <linux/phy/phy.h> with their presence in
MAINTAINERS.