Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 01/10] xen/arm: add generic TEE mediator framework

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan,

On 22/05/2019 11:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 22.05.19 at 11:27, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 22/05/2019 09:45, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > On 21.05.19 at 23:25, <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >    MAINTAINERS                   |   6 ++
> > > >    xen/arch/arm/Kconfig          |   7 +++
> > > >    xen/arch/arm/Makefile         |   1 +
> > > >    xen/arch/arm/domain.c         |  18 ++++++
> > > >    xen/arch/arm/setup.c          |   2 +
> > > >    xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile     |   1 +
> > > >    xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c        |  93 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >    xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c           |   5 ++
> > > >    xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S        |   7 +++
> > > >    xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h  |   1 +
> > > >    xen/include/asm-arm/tee/tee.h | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >    xen/include/public/arch-arm.h |   3 +
> > > >    12 files changed, 253 insertions(+)
> > > >    create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile
> > > >    create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
> > > >    create mode 100644 xen/include/asm-arm/tee/tee.h
> > > I don't think I'm asking this for the first time: Why am I being Cc-ed
> > > here? It's all Arm code that gets changed, and the MAINTAINERS
> > > addition alone imo doesn't warrant widening the Cc list.
> > A lot of users uses the scripts/{add, get}_maintainers.pl to get the list of
> >
> > maintainers to CCed. Both of them output "THE REST" because of the file
> > MAINTAINERS is modified.
> >
> > I don't think it is sensible to expect users to know when to strip the
> > list...
> Hmm, well, I see your point, but I think applying some common sense
> still can be expected. It's also not sensible for unrelated people to
> get Cc-ed. I think anyone knowing enough to modify MAINTAINERS
> can be expected to know whom to Cc.
I disagree here, someone in "THE REST" may have an opinion in adding Volodymyr 
as a maintainer (this is only example).
This is a bit similar to when you send a patch to add a 3 lines timer helper in 
a common header but it is only used by x86. Even if I will not necessary answer 
on the patch because it does not impact Arm directly, I will still have a quick 
look to see if it makes sense.
Anyway, you can't expect the contributor to guess your will on MAINTAINERS. You 
should update the documentation/script if this is the expectation you have.
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel