Hi Andy,
On 10/17/25 10:56, Andy Yan wrote:
Hello Maud，
At 2025-10-17 15:58:22, "Maud Spierings"<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Andy,
From: Andy Yan<[email protected]>
Add entry for Innosilicon hdmi bridge library
Signed-off-by: Andy Yan<[email protected]>
---
(no changes since v1)
MAINTAINERS | 8 ++++++++
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index f9f985c7d7479..0adcfb1c264a1 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -12299,6 +12299,14 @@ M: Samuel Holland<[email protected]>
S: Maintained
F: drivers/power/supply/ip5xxx_power.c
+INNOSILICON HDMI BRIDGE DRIVER
+M: Andy Yan<[email protected]>
+L: [email protected]
+S: Maintained
+T: githttps://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/misc/kernel.git
+F: drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/inno-hdmi.c
+F: include/drm/bridge/inno_hdmi.h
+
INOTIFY
M: Jan Kara<[email protected]>
R: Amir Goldstein<[email protected]>
--
2.43.0
I believe this patch should be squashed into the patch that actually
creates the files listed in the MAINTAINERS entry, like I do here [1].
Checkpatch should be complaining about patch [1/2] if I'm not mistaken,
when you run `b4 prep --check`.
We talked about something similar here[2]：
Maxime believes they should be separate patches,
And I've seen many merged commits in the kernel are also handle MAINTAINERS
entry as separate patches
[2]https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/3ygqnj4idey7u4m7ltlv7pnfhkkvcepmpfdijdszctaeopq3ky@qteg33comjl3/
It seems there are indeed opinions about this [3], guess whatever the
actual maintainer wants is what will happen, sorry to disturb. Would be
nice to get some central guideline about how it should be. [3]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
[1]
Kind regards,
Maud
