[alsa-devel] linux-api scope (Re: [PATCH v2 11/22] media: dvb-frontend invoke enable/disable_source handlers)
[cc list heavily trimmed]
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Shuah Khan shuahkh@osg.samsung.com wrote:
Change dvb frontend to check if tuner is free when device opened in RW mode. Call to enable_source handler either returns with an active pipeline to tuner or error if tuner is busy. Tuner is released when frontend is released calling the disable_source handler.
As an actual subscriber to linux-api, I prefer for the linux-api list to be lowish-volume and mostly limited to API-related things. Is this API related? Do people think that these series should be sent to linux-api?
Thanks, Andy
[expanding the CC a little]
Hi Andy, (and Shuah)
On 4 February 2016 at 05:51, Andy Lutomirski luto@kernel.org wrote:
[cc list heavily trimmed]
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Shuah Khan shuahkh@osg.samsung.com wrote:
Change dvb frontend to check if tuner is free when device opened in RW mode. Call to enable_source handler either returns with an active pipeline to tuner or error if tuner is busy. Tuner is released when frontend is released calling the disable_source handler.
As an actual subscriber to linux-api, I prefer for the linux-api list to be lowish-volume and mostly limited to API-related things. Is this API related? Do people think that these series should be sent to linux-api?
I think not, and I'd like to stem the flood of mail to the list. There's two things that we could do:
1. Shuah, I know we talked about this in the past, and it made some sense to me at the time for kselftest to use linux-api@, but maybe it's time to create a dedicated list, and move the traffic there? It'd help focus the traffic of linux-api more on its original purpose.
2. However, I think the bigger cause of the flood is the change made to MAINTAINERS by Josh's commit ea8f8fc8631d9f890580a94d57a18bfeb827fa2e:
+ABI/API +L: linux-api@vger.kernel.org +F: Documentation/ABI/ +F: include/linux/syscalls.h +F: include/uapi/ +F: kernel/sys_ni.c
The change was well-intentioned (I Acked it), but folk run scripts/get-maintainers.pl without thinking too much about its output and add all of the resulting lists and CCs to their patch submissions. This means we get a lot of useless noise relating to drivers and unrelated Documentation changes, and actually miss some of the really important changes (e.g., extensions of system calls; and new /proc entries tend to get lost in the noise). Furthermore, people doing things such as adding new system calls often don't tun scripts/get-maintainers.pl it seems. Certainly, I have to often enough remind peple to CC linux-api when adding new system calls.
I'll craft a patch to trim the MAINTAINERS entry.
Cheers,
Michael
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 02/04/2016 07:04 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
[expanding the CC a little]
Hi Andy, (and Shuah)
On 4 February 2016 at 05:51, Andy Lutomirski luto@kernel.org wrote:
[cc list heavily trimmed]
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Shuah Khan shuahkh@osg.samsung.com wrote:
Change dvb frontend to check if tuner is free when device opened in RW mode. Call to enable_source handler either returns with an active pipeline to tuner or error if tuner is busy. Tuner is released when frontend is released calling the disable_source handler.
As an actual subscriber to linux-api, I prefer for the linux-api list to be lowish-volume and mostly limited to API-related things. Is this API related? Do people think that these series should be sent to linux-api?
I think not, and I'd like to stem the flood of mail to the list. There's two things that we could do:
I simply followed the getmaintainers generate3d list. A bit surprised to see linux-api, but didn't want to leave it out.
- Shuah, I know we talked about this in the past, and it made some
sense to me at the time for kselftest to use linux-api@, but maybe it's time to create a dedicated list, and move the traffic there? It'd help focus the traffic of linux-api more on its original purpose.
Yes that is a good plan - I will request a new mailing list and send in a patch to Kselftest MAINTIANER's entry.
- However, I think the bigger cause of the flood is the change made
to MAINTAINERS by Josh's commit ea8f8fc8631d9f890580a94d57a18bfeb827fa2e:
+ABI/API +L: linux-api@vger.kernel.org +F: Documentation/ABI/ +F: include/linux/syscalls.h +F: include/uapi/ +F: kernel/sys_ni.c
The change was well-intentioned (I Acked it), but folk run scripts/get-maintainers.pl without thinking too much about its output and add all of the resulting lists and CCs to their patch submissions. This means we get a lot of useless noise relating to drivers and unrelated Documentation changes, and actually miss some of the really important changes (e.g., extensions of system calls; and new /proc entries tend to get lost in the noise). Furthermore, people doing things such as adding new system calls often don't tun scripts/get-maintainers.pl it seems. Certainly, I have to often enough remind peple to CC linux-api when adding new system calls.
I'll craft a patch to trim the MAINTAINERS entry.
Thanks for doing this, -- Shuah
Hi Shuah,
On 4 February 2016 at 15:35, Shuah Khan shuahkh@osg.samsung.com wrote:
On 02/04/2016 07:04 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
[expanding the CC a little]
Hi Andy, (and Shuah)
On 4 February 2016 at 05:51, Andy Lutomirski luto@kernel.org wrote:
[cc list heavily trimmed]
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Shuah Khan shuahkh@osg.samsung.com wrote:
Change dvb frontend to check if tuner is free when device opened in RW mode. Call to enable_source handler either returns with an active pipeline to tuner or error if tuner is busy. Tuner is released when frontend is released calling the disable_source handler.
As an actual subscriber to linux-api, I prefer for the linux-api list to be lowish-volume and mostly limited to API-related things. Is this API related? Do people think that these series should be sent to linux-api?
I think not, and I'd like to stem the flood of mail to the list. There's two things that we could do:
I simply followed the getmaintainers generate3d list. A bit surprised to see linux-api, but didn't want to leave it out.
Yep -- you and many others. That's the problem with automated solutions ;-).
- Shuah, I know we talked about this in the past, and it made some
sense to me at the time for kselftest to use linux-api@, but maybe it's time to create a dedicated list, and move the traffic there? It'd help focus the traffic of linux-api more on its original purpose.
Yes that is a good plan - I will request a new mailing list and send in a patch to Kselftest MAINTIANER's entry.
Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience. I guess a prominent mail onto linux-api@ advertising the new list, once it has been created, would not go amiss.
Cheers,
Michael
participants (3)
-
Andy Lutomirski -
Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) -
Shuah Khan