linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: audio-graph-card2: use correct endpoint when getting link parameters

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: <dd64e1f4-1f58-4760-a664-04fa6723e531@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:01:09 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@...il.com>
Cc: lgirdwood@...il.com, perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com, tony@...mide.com,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Merlijn Wajer <merlijn@...zup.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: audio-graph-card2: use correct endpoint when
 getting link parameters

On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 06:24:18PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:

> I understand people are busy, but I also see community sent patches being
> treated with low priority, or being silently ignored too often lately, but
> lets not go into that.

> I sent that RFC patch on 20.12.2024, today is 13.10.2025 - if this is not a
> reasonable time, well, what is? By the same time I sent 2 other patches and
> they are already in -next. In the meanwhile I see patches sent in the
> morning to be reviewed till the end of the day - not critical bugfixes
> patches but new functionality.

Well, you've used a subject line for a different subsystem so there's a
good chance that I simply didn't look at the mail beyond that (many of
us get a lot of random CCs).  You also don't seem to have CCed the ALSA
list, nor for that matter Morimoto-san who maintains the generic card so
perhaps I was just waiting for his review.  I honestly can't remember.
I'll also note that there's only been a week of work time for me so far
this year, and you sent this on the last day I worked last year.

> Also, I don't understand how the ping was content free, given that it was on
> top of the original patch, unless I don't get what "content free" is
> supposed to mean, possible, I am not native English speaker.

Your mail added the single word "ping".  That is not saying anything
meaningful so adds nothing, and as the form letter I sent indicated
results in a mail that's not directly actionable.  As it says:

| 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.

Blub for the subject letter thing:

Please submit patches using subject lines reflecting the style for the
subsystem, this makes it easier for people to identify relevant patches.
Look at what existing commits in the area you're changing are doing and
make sure your subject lines visually resemble what they're doing.
There's no need to resubmit to fix this alone.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)