Re: [PATCH 0/1] About MIPS/Loongson maintainance

[James Hogan]

On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 09:10:10PM +0800, Jiaxun Yang wrote:
> On 2017-12-07 Thu 11:05 +0000ïJames Hogan Wroteï
> > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 07:57:59AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 02:31:07PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > > > Hi, Linus, Stephen, Greg, Ralf and James,
> > > > 
> > > > We are kernel developers from Lemote Inc. and Loongson community.
> > > > We
> > > > have already made some contributions in Linux kernel, but we hope
> > > > we
> > > > can do more works.
> > > > 
> > > > Of course Loongson is a sub-arch in MIPS, but linux-mips
> > > > community is
> > > > so inactive (Maybe maintainers are too busy?) that too many
> > > > patches (
> > > > Not only for Loongson, but also for other sub-archs) were delayed
> > > > for
> > > > a long time. So we are seeking a more efficient way to make
> > > > Loongson
> > > > patches be merged in upstream.
> > > > 
> > > > Now we have a github organization for collaboration:
> > > > https://github.com/linux-loongson/linux-loongson.git
> > > 
> > > Ick, why not get a kernel.org account for your git tree?
> > > 
> > > > We don't want to replace linux-mips, we just want to find a way
> > > > to co-
> > > > operate with linux-mips. So we will still use the maillist and
> > > > patchwork
> > > > of linux-mips, but we hope we can send pull requests from our
> > > > github to
> > > > linux-next and linux-mainline by ourselves (if there is no
> > > > objections
> > > > to our patches from linux-mips community).
> > > 
> > > What does the mips maintainers think about this?
> > > 
> > > Odds are a linux-next tree is fine, but they probably want to merge
> > > the
> > > trees into their larger mips one for the pulls to Linus, much like
> > > the
> > > arm-core tree works, right?
> > 
> > I'm not officially a MIPS maintainer but I have donned the hat
> > unofficially a few times lately, so FWIW I think the Loongson stuff
> > should go through the MIPS tree, since it so often touches core
> > architecture code.
> Yes we are always touching architecture code. For that part, we'll
> still submit our patches to linux-mips tree. But we're also maintaining
> many platform code under /arch/mips/loongson64 and also platform
> drivers such as hwmon, cpufreq and YeeLoong Laptop driver I'm trying to
> submit recently.

The drivers at least can always go in via the relevant driver subsystem
anyway, though of course if they're tightly bound to arch headers that
could still be painful, as I found out here when trying to fix some
build errors there:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171115211755.25102-1-james.hogan@xxxxxxxx

Cheers
James

> For that part, make a pull request might be more
> efficient than apply patches to linux-mips for many times. Just as what
> arm architecture did.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature