linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Add support for power budget

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250117145710.36ab4cc9@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 14:57:10 +0100
From: Kory Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Oleksij Rempel
 <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>, kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Add support for power budget

On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 13:48:54 +0000
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 01:09:36PM +0100, Kory Maincent wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:41:56 +0100  
> 
> > > In preparation for future support of PSE budget evaluation strategy and
> > > power management, we need the power budget value of the power supply.  
> 
> > Is there hope this will be merged before the merge window?  
> 
> 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.

Ok, dully noted! Sorry for the noise!

Regards,
-- 
Köry Maincent, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com