Re: [RFC] ARM Subarchitecture group maintainership

[Barry Song]

2011/5/18 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>:
> This is the draft plan for maintaining the ARM subarchitectures in a common
> tree, as a way to help coordinate the upstream merging of the
> arch/arm/{plat,mach}-* changes into Linus' tree.
>
> This was discussed in great length at the Linaro Developer Summit in Budapest
> last week where we worked out an initial plan. We are modeling the maintainance
> after how the linux-tip tree is used for the x86 architecture, with a set
> of developers that have commit access to one tree on kernel.org and
> have mutual trust in one another. Nicolas Pitre and me are funded
> by Linaro to do the bulk of the work, while Thomas Gleixner will help
> us part-time with his long time architecture maintainance experience.
> Despite the funding by Linaro, this is not a Linaro project and all
> ARM subarchitectures are welcome to go through our tree.
>
> Russell King's role as ARM maintainer is of course unchanged by this, but
> he has the same commit access to the new tree as the other maintainers and
> is welcome to work in the same tree. We are also open to nominations for
> further people outside of Linaro to join us as committers. Marc Zyngier from
> ARM ltd is one of the candidates that has been suggested and I would also
> like to see someone from Google. We have to find the right balance with the
> number of committers so we get all the work done without stepping on each
> other's toes.
>
> Our tree will be strictly organized in topic brances so we can feed them
> upstream in the bitesized chunks that Linus likes. The master branch
> is an integration branch that pulls all other branches that are scheduled
> for the next merge window and itself gets integrated into linux-next.
>
> We will probably not be fully functional during the 2.6.40 merge window,
> but we are trying our best to be useful. For 2.6.41, my hope is that
> we can merge the bulk of the ARM subarchitecture changes through this
> tree. Once Linus is happy with the way that the process works, we can
> mandate that all ARM subarchitecture changes go through our tree, until
> then it stays voluntary.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> ---
>
> Maintainers: If you are happy with the layout of the process,
> please ack this patch, otherwise please comment.
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 8fce5e6..942d052 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -630,6 +630,17 @@ S: Maintained
> ÂF: Â Â drivers/amba/
> ÂF: Â Â include/linux/amba/bus.h
>
> +ARM SUBARCHITECTURES
> +M: Â Â Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> +M: Â Â Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> +M: Â Â Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> +M: Â Â arm@xxxxxxxxxx
> +L: Â Â linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
> +S: Â Â MAINTAINEDftp.arm.linux.org.uk Git - linux-2.6-arm.git/summary
> +F: Â Â arch/arm/mach-*/
> +F: Â Â arch/arm/plat-*/
> +T: Â Â git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm/arm-subarch.git
> +

does it mean if we want to add a new SoC plat/mach, we will send
patches againest this tree?
will this tree merge into rmk's tree? then rmk's tree will only manage
arm common codes?

> ÂARM/ADI ROADRUNNER MACHINE SUPPORT
> ÂM: Â Â Lennert Buytenhek <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ÂL: Â Â linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/