Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Mar 2023 16:41:36 +0000 | From | Lee Jones <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/9] phy: phy-ocelot-serdes: add ability to be used in a non-syscon configuration |
| |
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 01:34:31PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 02:19:44PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > On 17-03-23, 11:54, Colin Foster wrote: > > > > > The phy-ocelot-serdes module has exclusively been used in a syscon setup, > > > > > from an internal CPU. The addition of external control of ocelot switches > > > > > via an existing MFD implementation means that syscon is no longer the only > > > > > interface that phy-ocelot-serdes will see. > > > > > > > > > > In the MFD configuration, an IORESOURCE_REG resource will exist for the > > > > > device. Utilize this resource to be able to function in both syscon and > > > > > non-syscon configurations. > > > > > > > > Applied to phy/next, thanks > > > > > > Please read the netdev FAQ. Patches sent to netdev contain the tree that > > > the submitter wishes the patches to be applied to. > > > > > > As a result, I see davem has just picked up the *entire* series which > > > means that all patches are in net-next now. net-next is immutable. > > > > > > In any case, IMHO if this kind of fly-by cherry-picking from patch > > > series is intended, it should be mentioned during review to give a > > > chance for other maintainers to respond and give feedback. Not all > > > submitters will know how individual maintainers work. Not all > > > maintainers know how other maintainers work. > > > > Once again netdev seems to have applied patches from other subsystems > > without review/ack. What makes netdev different to any other kernel > > subsystem? What would happen if other random maintainers started > > applying netdev patches without appropriate review? I suspect someone > > would become understandably grumpy. > > Why again are you addressing your whinge to me? I'm not one of the > netdev maintainers, but I've pointed out what happens in netdev > land. However, you seem to *not* want to discuss it directly with > DaveM/Jakub/Paolo - as illustrated again with yet another response > to *me* rather than addressing your concerns *to* the people who > you have an issue with. > > This is not communication. Effectively, this is sniping, because > rather than discussing it with the individuals concerned, you are > instead preferring to discuss it with others. > > Please stop this.
Read the above paragraph again.
It was an open question, *intentionally* not directed *at* anyone.
You just happen to be the one describing yet another unfortunate situation. Consider yourself a victim of circumstance and try not to take any of it personally.
It's the workflow and the assumptions that I'm unhappy about and that I think should be improved upon. The gripe is not against any one individual or individuals.
-- Lee Jones [李琼斯]
| |