OpenSDV
/
original_kernel
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge patch series "Documentation: RISC-V: patch-acceptance changes" 

Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com> says:

We've had a patch acceptance policy that doesn't match reality, this
changes the policy and also makes some more minor cleanups as well.

* b4-shazam-merge:
  Documentation: RISC-V: patch-acceptance: s/implementor/implementer
  Documentation: RISC-V: Mention the UEFI Standards
  Documentation: RISC-V: Allow patches for non-standard behavior
  Documentation: RISC-V: Fix a typo in patch-acceptance

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221207020815.16214-1-palmer@rivosinc.com
Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
This commit is contained in:
Palmer Dabbelt 2022-12-13 09:21:48 -08:00
parent c528ef0888 a39c636506
commit 6e66e96e31
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 2E1319F35FBB1889
1 changed files with 14 additions and 8 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

22
Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
View File

@ -20,16 +20,22 @@ Submit Checklist Addendum
-------------------------
We'll only accept patches for new modules or extensions if the
specifications for those modules or extensions are listed as being
"Frozen" or "Ratified" by the RISC-V Foundation. (Developers may, of
course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees that contain code for
any draft extensions that they wish.)
unlikely to be incompatibly changed in the future. For
specifications from the RISC-V foundation this means "Frozen" or
"Ratified", for the UEFI forum specifications this means a published
ECR. (Developers may, of course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees
that contain code for any draft extensions that they wish.)
Additionally, the RISC-V specification allows implementors to create
Additionally, the RISC-V specification allows implementers to create
their own custom extensions. These custom extensions aren't required
to go through any review or ratification process by the RISC-V
Foundation. To avoid the maintenance complexity and potential
performance impact of adding kernel code for implementor-specific
RISC-V extensions, we'll only to accept patches for extensions that
have been officially frozen or ratified by the RISC-V Foundation.
(Implementors, may, of course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees
containing code for any custom extensions that they wish.)
RISC-V extensions, we'll only consider patches for extensions that either:
- Have been officially frozen or ratified by the RISC-V Foundation, or
- Have been implemented in hardware that is widely available, per standard
Linux practice.
(Implementers, may, of course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees containing
code for any custom extensions that they wish.)