[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <VE1PR04MB6638C99F592E5FEEB08A3A8589DB0@VE1PR04MB6638.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 13:57:20 +0000
From: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@....com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: "s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
"shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
"u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de" <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
"dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
"l.stach@...gutronix.de" <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
"martin.fuzzey@...wbird.group" <martin.fuzzey@...wbird.group>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v7 00/13] add ecspi ERR009165 for i.mx6/7 soc family
On 2020/04/15 17:20 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 08:41:17AM +0000, Robin Gong wrote:
> > Ping....
> > On 2020/03/11 16:35 Robin Gong <yibin.gong@....com> wrote:
> > > There is ecspi ERR009165 on i.mx6/7 soc family, which cause FIFO
> > > transfer to
>
> Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time for
> review. People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so on so
> unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes) please allow at
> least a couple of weeks for review. If there have been review comments then
> people may be waiting for those to be addressed.
>
> Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at
> all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed directly if
> something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches anyway, so
> sending again is generally a better approach though there are some other
> maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches for the subsystem
> are normally handled.
Thanks Mark for the kind reminding. Will resend patches instead.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists