[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220716111551.64rjruz4q4g5uzee@skbuf>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 14:15:51 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Alvin Šipraga <alsi@...g-olufsen.dk>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
George McCollister <george.mccollister@...il.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@...iatek.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/6] net: dsa: always use phylink
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 04:03:59PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 21:59:24 +0100 Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > The only thing that delayed them was your eventual comments about
> > re-working how it was being done. Yet again, posting the RFC series
> > created very little in the way of feedback. I'm getting to the point
> > of thinking its a waste of time posting RFC patches - it's counter
> > productive. RFC means "request for comments" but it seems that many
> > interpret it as "I can ignore it".
>
> I'm afraid you are correct. Dave used to occasionally apply RFC patches
> which kept reviewers on their toes a little bit (it kept me for sure).
> These days patchwork automatically marks patches as RFC based on
> the subject, tossing them out of "Action required" queue. So they are
> extremely easy to ignore.
>
> Perhaps an alternative way of posting would be to write "RFC only,
> please don't apply" at the end of the cover letter. Maybe folks will
> at least get thru reading the cover letter then :S
Again, expressing complaints to me for responding late is misdirected
frustration. The fact that I chose to leave my comments only when
Russell gave up on waiting for feedback from Andrew doesn't mean I
ignored his RFC patches, it just means I didn't want to add noise and
ask for minor changes when it wasn't clear that this is the overall
final direction that the series would follow. I still have preferences
about the way in which this patch set gets accepted, and now seems like
the proper moment to express them.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists