lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/4] soundwire: sdw_slave: add new fields to track probe status
On 08-11-19, 08:55, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
>
> On 11/7/19 10:29 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 04-11-19, 08:32, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/2/19 11:56 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > On 23-10-19, 16:06, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > > > > Changes to the sdw_slave structure needed to solve race conditions on
> > > > > driver probe.
> > > >
> > > > Can you please explain the race you have observed, it would be a very
> > > > useful to document it as well
> > >
> > > the races are explained in the [PATCH 00/18] soundwire: code hardening and
> > > suspend-resume support series.
> >
> > It would make sense to explain it here as well to give details to
> > reviewers, there is nothing wrong with too much detail!
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > The functionality is added in the next patch.
> > > >
> > > > which one..?
> > >
> > > [PATCH 00/18] soundwire: code hardening and suspend-resume support
> >
> > Yeah great! let me play detective with 18 patch series. I asked for a
> > patch and got a series!
> >
> > Again, please help the maintainer to help you. We would love to see this
> > merged as well, but please step up and give more details in cover
> > letter and changelogs. I shouldn't need to do guesswork and scan through the
> > inbox to find the context!
>
> We are clearly not going anywhere.

Correct as you don't seem to provide clear answers, I am asking again
which patch implements the new fields added here, how difficult is it to
provide the *specific* patch which implements this so that I can compare
the implementation and see why this is needed and apply if fine!

But no you will not provide a clear answer and start ranting!

> I partitioned the patches to make your maintainer life easier and help the
> integration of SoundWire across two trees. All I get is negative feedback,
> grand-standing, and zero comments on actual changes.

No you get asked specific question which you do not like and start off
on a tangent!

> For the record, I am mindful of reviewer/maintainer workload, and I did
> contact you in September to check your availability and provided a pointer
> to initial code changes. I did send a first version a week prior to your
> travel/vacation, I resend another version when you were back and waited yet
> another two weeks to resend a second version. I also contacted Takashi, Mark
> and you to suggest this code partition, and did not get any pushback. It's
> not like I am pushing stuff down your throat, I have been patient and
> considerate.
>
> Please start with the patches "soundwire: code hardening and suspend-resume
> support" and come back to this interface description when you have reviewed
> these changes. It's not detective work, it's working around the consequences
> of having separate trees for Audio and SoundWire.

Again, which patch in the series does implement these new members!

--
~Vinod

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-11-09 12:13    [W:0.069 / U:3.880 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site