From 8d836581f9b1f57ceaa2b47654754ef1260b410b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Niklas Cassel Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 15:00:32 +0200 Subject: ata: libata-scsi: fix ata_dsm_trim_pages() kernel-doc make htmldocs fails with: Documentation/driver-api/libata:604: ./drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c:2301: ERROR: Unexpected indentation. [docutils] The Return: section of ata_dsm_trim_pages() ends its first sentence with a colon and continues with an indented bullet list. reStructuredText requires a blank line before an indented block, so docutils chokes on the list. Simply adding the missing blank line does not work either: Return: is a kernel-doc "special section", which is terminated by the first blank line, so the bullet list would end up in the Description section, detached from the sentence introducing it. Spell the two bounds out as prose instead, so that the Return: section stays self-contained. Documentation-only change. Fixes: e64e6b5dc867 ("ata: libata-scsi: scale DSM TRIM payload by MAX PAGES PER DSM COMMAND") Reported-by: Thomas Huth Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/b0a0b8e8-cc4f-4c7b-8bc5-fee0712d405a@redhat.com/ Reviewed-by: Damien Le Moal Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260916130031.29990-2-cassel@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel --- Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst (limited to 'Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst') 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. + -- cgit v1.3.1