linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: atmel: ATMEL drivers depend on HAS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6734cd67-ae14-74f4-a78e-b6a810c1cdec@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 28 Jun 2021 09:03:25 -0700
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Codrin Ciubotariu <codrin.ciubotariu@...rochip.com>,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Bo Shen <voice.shen@...el.com>,
        Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: atmel: ATMEL drivers depend on HAS_DMA

On 6/28/21 6:02 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 03:28:59PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> [adding LKML]
>>
>> ping?
> 
> 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.

a. The entire email/patch was there. Should I put the ping _after_ the patch?
Would that help?

b. What do you consider a reasonable time?  The patch was sent 28 days
prior to this gentle ping.

> 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.
> 

Yes, I shall resend the patch. Thanks.

-- 
~Randy