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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 24 Feb 2023 09:42:17 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        soc@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/8] dt-bindings: leds: register-bit-led: Add
 active-low property

On 23/02/2023 21:59, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 5:48 PM Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Thursday 23 February 2023 14:22:52 Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 26 Dec 2022, Pali Rohár wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Allow to define inverted logic (0 - enable LED, 1 - disable LED) via
>>>>> active-low property.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/register-bit-led.yaml | 5 +++++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> Needs a DT Ack (now Cc:ed)
>>>
>>> I can't do anything with this set until we have a DT Ack.
>>>
>>> If you don't receive one soon, I'd suggest resending the set again with
>>> all of the DT people on Cc that it should have been sent to in the first
>>> place.
>>
>> (Re)Sending one email multiple times is against email etiquette,
>> moreover it is spam technique and reason for marking sender on the
>> blacklist.
> 
> No problem on the kernel mailing lists actually, we love to mail
> bomb each other here. Yeah maybe we are a bit weird :/
> 
>> Moreover I have already sent it more than one time. DT people are known
>> to not respond to patches and pull requests and I have no motivation to
>> send reminder emails for them for more than half of year.

Is this a joke? You got here response within one day!

Sent: 18th of August
Reviewed-by: 19th of August

https://lore.kernel.org/all/f635d5a7-6817-cd62-e395-63e346775716@linaro.org/

You ignored the tag and then ignored the process and not Cc'ed us. Yet
you complain that someone did not respond to your emails. Really?


>>
>> So I would suggest to not send emails to people who just do not want to
>> receive or read emails. It is logical reaction.
>>
>> This patch is here for more than 6 months, so I do not see reason why to
>> wait for Godot. Rather move forward than stepping at the same position.
> 
> I understand that it is annoying.
> 
> In my experience Krzysztof and Rob (now added on To) are usually
> quite responsive and helpful, so something must have made them
> miss it I think.
> 
> As subsystem maintainer, if the DT reviewers haven't said anything
> in ~2 weeks I tend to sanity check the binding as best I can and then
> merge it. The bigger and more complex it is the more hesitant I get to
> do this...

Yeah... this patch was never sent to us, thus regardless how hard we
work, it would be quite difficult to answer emails which we never received.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ