summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorSven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>2026-09-09 11:29:53 +0200
committerMasami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>2026-09-10 08:43:35 +0900
commitd22c3e0088e85be8131f7a9283f759cdbb20726d (patch)
tree9668df2aa27b26f850d3ba5ba1287e443803675c /Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst
downloadlinux-stable-d22c3e0088e85be8131f7a9283f759cdbb20726d.tar.gz
linux-stable-d22c3e0088e85be8131f7a9283f759cdbb20726d.zip
selftests/ftrace: Fix unique symbol check in kprobe_non_uniq_symbol.tcgrafted
The current regex also matches symbols in modules, which makes the test fail on s390 where name_show is present only once in the kernel, but also multiple times in modules: 000001b1401cdc20 t name_show 000001b0c05e6c40 t name_show [mdev] 000001b0c0495f30 t name_show [i2c_core] Fix this by changing the regular expression to only match the function name. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260909092954.2200558-1-svens@linux.ibm.com/ Fixes: 03b80ff8023a ("selftests/ftrace: Add new test case which checks non unique symbol") Signed-off-by: Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst72
1 files changed, 72 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..ecc3ed638
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+======================================
+Devicetree and Open Firmware Subsystem
+======================================
+
+Other Process Documents
+-----------------------
+
+Please see the documents in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ for information
+on how to write proper Devicetree bindings and how to submit patches.
+
+Patch Review and Handling
+-------------------------
+
+Patches handled by Devicetree maintainers are processed differently depending
+on the patch type:
+
+1. Core OF driver code, e.g. drivers/of/:
+ patches are reviewed and applied by DT maintainers.
+
+2. Devicetree bindings:
+ patches are reviewed by DT maintainers, but should be applied by subsystem
+ maintainers except in certain cases. See also *For kernel maintainers* in
+ Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst.
+
+3. DTS and drivers:
+ DT maintainers might provide comments, but review is generally not expected.
+ DTS must pass schema checks (dtbs_check) or at least do not add any
+ new warnings.
+
+Patchwork
+~~~~~~~~~
+
+Devicetree maintainers review patches using Patchwork, so the current status of
+a patch can be checked there. For typical driver submissions, Patchwork
+receives the entire patch set, but only a few patches are usually Devicetree
+bindings that are reviewed by DT maintainers.
+
+Explanation of Patchwork statuses:
+
+ - **New**: Not yet processed by the automation toolset.
+ - **Needs ACK**: Waiting for review by DT maintainers.
+ - **Handled Elsewhere**: Non-DT patch; not being reviewed here.
+ - **RFC**: Patch was likely ignored because it was an incomplete RFC.
+ - **Changes Requested**: Patch was reviewed and DT maintainers expect changes.
+ - **Accepted**: Patch was reviewed and applied by DT maintainers to their tree.
+ - **Not Applicable**: Patch was reviewed and is likely in good shape, with a
+ *Reviewed-by* or *Acked-by* tag provided, but DT maintainers expect someone
+ else to apply it.
+
+Patch Re-review and Pinging
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Due to the high volume of email traffic, Devicetree maintainers do not read
+every email they receive and instead rely on Patchwork during the review
+process. They also often skip patches that have already been reviewed.
+
+As a result, maintainers might miss:
+
+1. Questions about already reviewed patches.
+2. Pings, for example when a patch has been reviewed by DT maintainers but has
+ not been picked up by subsystem maintainers.
+
+Such cases can be addressed by:
+
+1. Pinging DT maintainers on the IRC channel.
+2. Dropping the DT maintainer’s *Acked-by* or *Reviewed-by* tag when sending a new
+ version of the patch set, together with an explanation in the patch
+ changelog describing why the tag was removed and what is expected from DT
+ maintainers.
+