Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 09:34:17 +0200
From: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
 Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@...cinc.com>,
 Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
 Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [v1,1/3] drm/panel: ili9341: Correct use of device property APIs

On 30/04/2024 11:34, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 12:54:39AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
>> On 2024/4/29 19:55, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 01:57:46PM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
>>>> On 2024/4/26 14:23, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 04:43:18AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024/4/26 03:10, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 02:08:16AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024/4/25 22:26, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> It seems driver missed the point of proper use of device property APIs.
>>>>>>>>> Correct this by updating headers and calls respectively.
>>>>>>>> You are using the 'seems' here exactly saying that you are not 100% sure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please allow me to tell you the truth: This patch again has ZERO effect.
>>>>>>>> It fix nothing. And this patch is has the risks to be wrong.
>>>>>>> Huh?! Really, stop commenting the stuff you do not understand.
>>>>>> I'm actually a professional display drivers developer at the downstream
>>>>>> in the past, despite my contribution to upstream is less. But I believe
>>>>>> that all panel driver developers know what I'm talking about. So please
>>>>>> have take a look at my replies.
>>>>> Most of the interactions you had in this series has been uncalled for.
>>>>> You might be against a patch, but there's no need to go to such length.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as I'm concerned, this patch is fine to me in itself, and I don't
>>>>> see anything that would prevent us from merging it.
>>>> No one is preventing you, as long as don't misunderstanding what other
>>>> people's technical replies intentionally. I'm just a usual and normal
>>>> contributor, I hope the world will better than yesterday.
>>> You should seriously consider your tone when replying then.
>>>
>>>> Saying such thing to me may not proper, I guess you may want to talk
>>>> to peoples who has the push rights
>>> I think you misunderstood me. My point was that your several rants were
>>> uncalled for and aren't the kind of things we're doing here.
>>>
>>> I know very well how to get a patch merged, thanks.
>>>
>>>> just make sure it isn't a insult to the professionalism of drm bridge
>>>> community itself though.
>>> I'm not sure why you're bringing the bridge community or its
>>> professionalism. It's a panel, not a bridge, and I never doubted the
>>> professionalism of anyone.
>>
>>
>> I means that the code itself could be adopted, as newer and younger
>> programmer (like Andy) need to be encouraged to contribute.
> 
> Andy has thousands of commits in Linux. He's *very* far from being a new
> contributor.
> 
>> I express no obvious objections, just hints him that something else
>> probably should also be taken into consideration as well.
> 
> That might be what you wanted to express, but you definitely didn't
> express it that way.
> 
>> On the other hand, we probably should allow other people participate
>> in discussion so that it is sufficient discussed and ensure that it
>> won't be reverted by someone in the future for some reasons. Backing
>> to out case happens here, we may need to move things forward. Therefore,
>> it definitely deserve to have a try. It is not a big deal even though
>> it gets reverted someday.
>>
>> In the end, I don't mind if you think there is nothing that could
>> prevent you from merge it, but I still suggest you have a glance at
>> peoples siting at the Cc list. I'm busy now and I have a lot of other
>> tasks to do, and may not be able to reply you emails on time. So it up
>> to you and other maintainers to decide.
>> Thank you.
> 
> So far, you're the only one who reviewed those patches. I'm not sure
> what you're talking about here.

Well I (as drm-panel maintainer) did review them positively because the patches looked
perfectly correct in regards of the commit message and the patchset motivation and
because I trust Andy being a long time contributor with a lot of expertise.

Anyway since the rant is finished I'll land the patches.

Neil

> 
> Maxime

Powered by blists - more mailing lists