linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] media: iris: Introduce vpu ops for vpu4 with necessary hooks

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: <e759c977-be91-4f2e-bb40-df61b5cf70ba@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 12:58:39 +0000
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bod@...nel.org>
To: Vikash Garodia <vikash.garodia@....qualcomm.com>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
 Dikshita Agarwal <dikshita.agarwal@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Abhinav Kumar <abhinav.kumar@...ux.dev>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Vishnu Reddy <busanna.reddy@....qualcomm.com>,
 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
 Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] media: iris: Introduce vpu ops for vpu4 with
 necessary hooks

On 16/01/2026 11:27, Vikash Garodia wrote:
>> Thank you for reviewing this code. I would like to point that it took
>> one month for Qualcomm to review this Qualcomm patch and in the same
>> time Vikash is sending emails (more than one!) that Bryan does not
>> review that fast as expected.
> Firstly, the ask to Bryan have been to pull patches (not stressed on
> review part), infact, even fixes are waiting for merge window while they
> can easily go into RCs. This part of the process need some improvement.
> 
> I have also appreciated him when he pulled long series for initial codec
> enablement, i think you missed those part.
> 
>> I do not find it acceptable approach to harass community reviewers that
>> way. Even if you do it internally, not on the lists.

lol

>> I think this review timeline is final argument for Vikash to stop
>> pushing such narratives and complains, because your review is expected
>> to be BEFORE the maintainer upper in the upstream flow.
> My understanding is that, if maintainer raise patches, then its more of
> reviews from community and having RB tag from any of community member or
> no open comments implies the series is good to go.
> 
> This series is lying there for a month without any open comment, there
> is nothing pending here to pull them.

2/6 patches in this series were marked in patchwork as having no RB so 
they weren't pulled.

That's the whole story here.

---
bod