ChanServ changed the topic of #armlinux to: ARM kernel talk [Upstream kernel, find your vendor forums for questions about their kernels] | https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/armlinux
nsaenz has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
nsaenz has joined #armlinux
kgaspard has joined #armlinux
kgaspard is now known as kgdrenefort
kgdrenefort has quit [Client Quit]
frieder has joined #armlinux
nsaenz_ has joined #armlinux
kgdrenefort has joined #armlinux
nsaenz_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
nsaenz has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
nsaenz has joined #armlinux
rgallaispou has joined #armlinux
headless has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
dhruvag2000 has quit [Server closed connection]
dhruvag2000 has joined #armlinux
monstr has joined #armlinux
marshmallow has quit [Changing host]
marshmallow has joined #armlinux
<narmstrong>
just bisected onto the same a5ae331edb02b664, too late^^
dhruvag2000 has quit [Changing host]
dhruvag2000 has joined #armlinux
krzk has quit [Server closed connection]
krzk has joined #armlinux
<dhruvag2000>
@broonie gentle ping on the patch for runtime pm: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/20230829062706.786637-1-d-gole@ti.com/T/#u . I haven't recieved any tested-by from other users of the drivers but neither have I received any concerns or NAK's . Can we take this patch in? Or do you prefer that I add some kind of TI specific quirk to check for and based on that enable / disable runtime pm in the driver probe?
<javierm>
arnd, geertu: sometimes the Kconfig symbols combination matrix makes my head hurt :)
nsaenz has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
nsaenz_ has joined #armlinux
hanetzer has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
hanetzer has joined #armlinux
hanetzer has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
hanetzer has joined #armlinux
nsaenz_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
mripard has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
mripard has joined #armlinux
Forty-Bot has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
mriesch has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
<broonie>
and please allow a realistic time for review, it's been about a day since the merge window closed.
rgallaispou has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
rgallaispou has joined #armlinux
ezulian has quit [Quit: ezulian]
ezulian has joined #armlinux
shailangsa has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
* ardb
wonders what a contentful ping looks like
<broonie>
ardb: In general pings are going to be content free
<ardb>
so not even dhruvag2000's wall of text qualifies as context?
nsaenz has joined #armlinux
<broonie>
Not really, I had to go open a browser to figure out what was being talked about.
nsaenz has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
nsaenz has joined #armlinux
<broonie>
(in general a resend tends to be a better option, it's directly actionable)
<javierm>
broonie, arnd: I always wondered whether would make sense to write down some of these maintainers' preferences in the MAINTAINERS entries
<broonie>
It keeps on being suggested but nobody came up with anything.
<javierm>
broonie: for instance, you have a very good track record of going through posted patches in your subsystems, even if it make you a few weeks to response
<broonie>
There's lots of stuff to encode (eg, what to base your patch on)
<javierm>
*respond
<javierm>
broonie: but people who are not usual contributors may not know that and think that fell through the cracks
<javierm>
broonie: yeah, I guess that's the hard part. To know what are the things to write down and have some level of consistency in the entries
<broonie>
Actually looking at submitting-patches.rst it claims a week turnaround time with only a minor note about merge windows which is a *bit* optimistic, especially where maintainers are leaving time for other people to review.
<javierm>
broonie: yeah, I believe 2 or 3 weeks is more realistic
TheCoffeMaker has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
shailangsa has joined #armlinux
heat has joined #armlinux
TheCoffeMaker has joined #armlinux
amitk has joined #armlinux
amitk has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
heat has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
heat has joined #armlinux
<geertu>
ardb: Probably something along the lines I sent for a lost renesas,rzg2l-irqc patch, as maz just applied it?
<geertu>
maz: thx!
<ardb>
geertu: arnd ^^^ ?
nsaenz has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<geertu>
ardb: Not this time ;-) It was you was wondering about the contentful ping, right?
<geertu>
you who was
ezulian has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
<maz>
geertu: np
<ardb>
ah ok
<ardb>
yes that was me
<robmur01>
Indeed, I also favour the "this still applies, but would you like me to resend it?" approach - I reckon an actionable question constitutes meaningful content :)
<broonie>
robmur01: The problem I find is that if it's genuinely been lost I lack any context for why it might not have been applied and now I have to handle an additional mail telling you to resend it so I can figure out what the patch actually is.
<broonie>
Whereas if the patch is resent I can just review the patch
<geertu>
broonie: That's why I use lore. Works fine even if I wasn't CCed onthe original submission.
<broonie>
geertu: Sure, I can go download the patch to figure out what they were talking about if I have network at the time but that's faff.
<robmur01>
broonie: ah, indeed, I guess a single patch that can remain quoted in entirety for context is one thing, but a reply to a cover letter where the whole original thread has vanished due to keyboard-shortcut-mishaps would be a different matter
* robmur01
feels fortunate to still avoid the responsibility of actually applying patches anywhere :)
<broonie>
and if it's not been lost the chances of me actually seeing the ping until I actually review the patches are low, plus a good chunk of the people who ping do so really quickly.
<robmur01>
maybe we need a mantra... "if it's not a fix, wait 'til rc6"
monstr has quit [Remote host closed the connection]