[PATCH v3 3/4] Documentation: RISC-V: Mention the UEFI Standards
Heiko Stübner
heiko at sntech.de
Wed Dec 7 07:44:07 PST 2022
Am Mittwoch, 7. Dezember 2022, 03:08:14 CET schrieb Palmer Dabbelt:
> The current patch acceptance policy requires that specifications are
> approved by the RISC-V foundation, but we rely on external
> specifications as well. This explicitly calls out the UEFI
> specifications that we're starting to depend on.
>
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley at microchip.com>
> Reviewed-by: Atish Patra <atishp at rivosinc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Anup Patel <anup at brainfault.org>
> Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at rivosinc.com>
> ---
> Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst | 8 +++++---
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
> index 16b90a31d267..02e6a48809ef 100644
> --- a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
> @@ -20,9 +20,11 @@ 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.)
Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner at vrull.eu>
More information about the linux-riscv
mailing list