Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Dec 2021 11:48:52 +0000 | From | "Russell King (Oracle)" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 5/5] net: mscc: ocelot: expose ocelot wm functions |
| |
On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 06:09:22PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 4 Dec 2021 10:28:58 -0800 Colin Foster wrote: > > Expose ocelot_wm functions so they can be shared with other drivers. > > > > Signed-off-by: Colin Foster <colin.foster@in-advantage.com> > > Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com> > > Yeah.. but there are no in-tree users of these. What's the story? > > I see Vladimir reviewed this so presumably we trust that the users > will materialize rather quickly?
Thank you for highlighting this.
Vladimir told me recently over the phylink get_interfaces vs get_caps change for DSA, and I quote:
David who applied your patch can correct me, but my understanding from the little time I've spent on netdev is that dead code isn't a candidate for getting accepted into the tree, even more so in the last few days before the merge window, from where it got into v5.16-rc1. ... So yes, I take issue with that as a matter of principle, I very much expect that a kernel developer of your experience does not set a precedent and a pretext for people who submit various shady stuff to the kernel just to make their downstream life easier.
This sounds very much like double-standards, especially as Vladimir reviewed this.
I'm not going to be spiteful NAK these patches, because we all need to get along with each other. I realise that it is sometimes useful to get code merged that facilitates or aids further development - provided that development is submitted in a timely manner.
-- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
| |