linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ASoC: starfive: Add JH7110 TDM driver

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

Message-ID: <d6dad1e0-59f7-e78c-cb9b-28342fbf0fac@starfivetech.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 May 2023 20:47:33 +0800
From:   Walker Chen <walker.chen@...rfivetech.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Claudiu Beznea <Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        "Takashi Iwai" <tiwai@...e.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        Emil Renner Berthing <emil.renner.berthing@...onical.com>,
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ASoC: starfive: Add JH7110 TDM driver



On 2023/5/15 18:51, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 04:29:07PM +0800, Walker Chen wrote:
> 
>> I have submitted new version of patch for TDM driver. Could you please help to review and give your comments? 
> 
> 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.

Hi Mark,

Sorry for that! Please forgive me for asking so eagerly.
I will pay attention to this in the future.

Best regards,
Walker