From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7026195A for ; Wed, 7 May 2014 13:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [95.142.166.194]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 505E020278 for ; Wed, 7 May 2014 13:30:16 +0000 (UTC) From: Laurent Pinchart To: Daniel Vetter Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 15:30:38 +0200 Message-ID: <2168265.ezyDqFgGPA@avalon> In-Reply-To: References: <2617712.JANppmYUxZ@avalon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Hans Verkuil , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Reviewing new API/ABI List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wednesday 07 May 2014 14:36:27 Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > We have seen several review, test and documentation procedures being > > developed for different subsystems in the recent past (two examples are > > the DRM i915 driver API test rules explained by Daniel Vetter in a reply > > to this mail thread, and the V4L test suite and documentation procedure) > > but I have seen little effort to consolidate good practice rules. The > > kernel would certainly benefit from both sharing information about how > > various subsystems tackle the API review/test/documentation problem. > > > > Forcing all subsystems to adhere and enforce a superset of rules would > > likely put too much burden on maintainers and developers, especially for > > the smaller subsystems. However, I believe we could help by gathering and > > consolidating the good practice rules in a single location under > > Documentation/. Maintainers could then implement those rules (or a subset > > thereof) without having to reinvent the wheel. Rules such as "return > > -EINVAL when a reserved parameter is set" are not complex to implement in > > code, the real challenge is to implement them in the brain of all > > developers and reviewers. > > I'd be very interested in a discussions about existing best practices > already developed in different subsystems and figuring out what > minimal standards we should requires across the board. So would I. The same topic is being discussed in the "stable issues" mail thread, it thus looks like a good candidate to me. On the V4L side Hans Verkuil (CC'ed) would likely be interested as a core V4L reviewer and userspace test case developer. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart