Re: [PATCH v3] MAINTAINERS: Update multiplexer subsystem maintainers and status

[Lad, Prabhakar]

Hi Peter,

On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 3:17 PM Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2026-07-07 19:59, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 07/07/2026 16:41, Peter Rosin wrote:
> >> On 2026-07-06 10:48, Prabhakar wrote:
> >>> From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> Update the multiplexer subsystem maintainer entry and change its status
> >>> from "Odd Fixes" to "Maintained".
> >>>
> >>> Move Peter to the CREDITS file to recognize his foundational work creating
> >>> and maintaining the subsystem. Incoming patches will now be reviewed,
> >>> tested, and routed via Greg closer to the RC5-RC6 release windows.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> v2->v3:
> >>> - Added Alvin and Antoniu as maintainers.
> >>> - Updated commit message.
> >>> - Added Reviewed-by tag.
> >>>
> >>> v1->v2:
> >>> - Added entry to CREDITS file
> >>> ---
> >>>    CREDITS     | 4 ++++
> >>>    MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++--
> >>>    2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/CREDITS b/CREDITS
> >>> index 8b229514ec8e..298d15e89c94 100644
> >>> --- a/CREDITS
> >>> +++ b/CREDITS
> >>> @@ -3513,6 +3513,10 @@ S: R. Anhanguera, 1487 - Ipiranga
> >>>    S: 79080-740 - Campo Grande - Mato Grosso do Sul
> >>>    S: Brazil
> >>>
> >>> +N: Peter Rosin
> >>> +E: peda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> +D: Multiplexer subsystem founder and former maintainer
> >>> +
> >>>    N: Stephen Rothwell
> >>>    E: sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>    W: http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr
> >>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> >>> index f96621b3214c..6ed6a2e43f6b 100644
> >>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> >>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> >>> @@ -18487,8 +18487,10 @@ F: include/linux/mmc/
> >>>    F:       include/uapi/linux/mmc/
> >>>
> >>>    MULTIPLEXER SUBSYSTEM
> >>> -M: Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> I oppose the removal. I also find it strange to request my
> >> removal without any attempt to reach out to me first.
> >
> > That's unfortunate. You have been Cc-ed, though. There were several
> > resends, pings, orphaned (never responded) patches on the mailing list,
> > eventually leading to entire discussion e.g.:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAD++jL=-nPyjbZH7fGBU10oP-gqEDzvyt+D49iSU9=h6t5CUqw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > Earlier I marked Mux subsystem as Odd fixes, which is close to "Orphaned".
> >
> > Worth looking at amount of pings here:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1777294876.git.tommaso.merciai.xr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > On 4th of May your commit updating email address was merged, so all
> > above and many earlier messages were sent to your @axentia email
> > address. I understand that this was a factor in this misunderstanding
> > but if @axentia stopped working on 30th of April, you could stay
> > reachable by either updating .mailmap entry earlier or by using
> > lei/korgalore simply to get the emails (I also do that for a few
> > subsystems I maintain).
> > > There were several attempts over past ~2 years, up to the point I even
> > collected patches and sent them to Greg.
> >
> > That's why I do not find it "strange".
>
> Yes, I'm perfectly aware that my track record is far from perfect.
> Thank you for picking up some of the slack and sorry for the inconvenience.
>
> My "strange" comment was regarding the fact that the maintainer update
> came seemingly from nowhere. I have now read the discussion in the other
> thread and see that all the discussion happened with the stale @axentia
> address CC:ed. But then, after that, these patches were sent to my new
> address w/o any reference to that discussion. I still call it strange
> to not involve the new mail address before requesting to remove me as
> maintainer, but given the history I can certainly understand why it
> happened.
>
> I replied in a bit of a panic, and probably failed to communicate as
> clearly as I could have.
>
> > If you want and have time to keep maintaining this, it would be great.
> > Please then commit to have time for this subsystem.
>
> Yes, I would like that, and I will make time. Also, the mux subsystem
> is small but do sport some unusual properties. A fair amount of people
> seem to misunderstand some of the basics.
>
Thank you for the reply and for clarifying the situation with the
email transition. It is completely understandable how the discussion
was missed given the stale @axentia address, and there are absolutely
no hard feelings regarding the initial reaction.
It is fantastic news that you have the time and desire to continue
maintaining the multiplexer subsystem.

Since a few of us (Alvin, Antoniu, and myself) have a vested interest
in the subsystem would happy to help when needed.

For now we can drop this patch.

Cheers,
Prabhakar