On 3/5/26 9:51 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > Hello Konrad, > > On Thu, Mar 05, 2026 at 09:39:35AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >>> index 55af015174a5..bdfa47d9c774 100644 >>> --- a/MAINTAINERS >>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>> @@ -10713,6 +10713,7 @@ F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/ >>> F: drivers/phy/ >>> F: include/dt-bindings/phy/ >>> F: include/linux/phy/ >>> +K: >>> \b(devm_)?(of_)?phy_(create|destroy|init|exit|reset|power_(on|off)|configure|validate|calibrate|(get|set)_(mode|media|speed|bus_width|drvdata)|get_max_link_rate|pm_runtime_(get|put)|notify_(connect|disconnect|state)|get|put|optional_get|provider_(un)?register|simple_xlate|(create|remove)_lookup)\b|(struct\s+)?phy(_ops|_attrs|_lookup|_provider)?\b|linux/phy/phy\.h|phy-props\.h|phy-provider\.h >> >> Would looking for the devm/of_phy_ prefix followed by an open parentheses >> not suffice for the 'has function call' case, instead of listing all >> currently present exported functions? > > This would maybe work when you run ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl on a file. > But I would like it to have good coverage on individual patches too. And > since the devm/of_phy prefix only matches when you "get" the PHY, not > "use" it, my fear is we would still be missing out on the most important > part of the patches.
But that's just '(devm_)?(of_)?phy_[a-z]+\(|includes.h'? Konrad
