[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YMIPjGtYfby6ZXKl@orome.fritz.box>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 15:11:40 +0200
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Sven Van Asbroeck <TheSven73@...il.com>,
Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@...ruber.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] pwm: core: Support new usage_power setting in PWM
state
On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 10:41:44PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello Thierry,
>
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 08:51:58PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > My problem is not that in the end a solution is picked that wasn't my
> > favourite. My problem is that I have the impression my arguments were
> > not considered but simply ignored.
>
> Another thing that annoys me is that there are currently ~20 open
> patches by me in patchwork, most of them are easy to understand cleanups
> and fixes, most of them are older than Clemens' series and most of them
> are uncommented by you. And in this situation you apply the only
> controversial series.
Clemens' series is actually older than those cleanups because it's been
in the works for many months now. And the reason why I'm prioritizing
Clemens' series is because it has broader impact and I want to make sure
it gets maximum soaking time in linux-next. Small fixes and cleanups are
less likely to break things, so I'm going to apply them after.
Thierry
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists