[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vf4nDX-LQr=_FCmv5rj_v-6ZHr4H8pHmAU_N2Wgy=c5ug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:20:04 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>,
Calvin Johnson <calvin.johnson@....nxp.com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Jon <jon@...id-run.com>,
Cristi Sovaiala <cristian.sovaiala@....com>,
Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>,
Madalin Bucur <madalin.bucur@....nxp.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux.cj@...il.com,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v7 1/6] Documentation: ACPI: DSD: Document MDIO PHY
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:13 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote:
> On 7/24/20 1:12 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:20 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> >
> >> I think we need to NACK all attempts to add ACPI support to phylib and
> >> phylink until an authoritative ACPI Linux maintainer makes an
> >> appearance and actively steers the work. And not just this patchset,
> >> but all patchsets in the networking domain which have an ACPI
> >> component.
> >
> > It's funny, since I see ACPI mailing list and none of the maintainers
> > in the Cc here...
> > I'm not sure they pay attention to some (noise-like?) activity which
> > (from their perspective) happens on unrelated lists.
>
> If you what you describe here is their perception of what is going on
> here, that is very encouraging, we are definitively going to make progress.
I can't speak for them. As a maintainer in other areas I expect that
people Cc explicitly maintainer(s) if they want more attention.
Otherwise I look at the mails to the mailing list just from time to
time. But this is my expectation, don't take me wrong.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists