| Message ID | 20130830202526.GW19598@titan.lakedaemon.net |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > Arnd, Olof, > > As requested, rebased on top of mvebu/drivers to resolve conflicts > internally. Sorry, I didn't have a chance to pull this in before the last -next before the merge window (which was already very late), so it'll have to wait for 3.13. Please send a fresh pull request of this branch once -rc1 is out. Thanks, -Olof
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:04:51AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > > Arnd, Olof, > > > > As requested, rebased on top of mvebu/drivers to resolve conflicts > > internally. > > Sorry, I didn't have a chance to pull this in before the last -next > before the merge window (which was already very late), so it'll have > to wait for 3.13. Please send a fresh pull request of this branch once > -rc1 is out. I'm sorry Olof, but I have to call bullshit. I originally sent this pull-request on August 14th (3 _weeks_ ago): http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg267243.html I heard crickets until your reply on August 29th (2 _weeks_ later): http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg270826.html Which I respun and resent within a day on August 30th: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg271170.html Also, these patches were in -next for at least a week _before_ I sent my first pull request on August 14th. So they've been tested for _four_weeks_ ... I understand you're busy with other work, like all of us, but it would seem that the baton passing between you, Arnd, and Kevin could use some tweaking. The situation is the exact same for the dove branch. :( Jason.
Jason, No code is lost, no code is rejected, it's just going to wait for 3.13. Stirring up drama over this is just going to be counterproductive for all parties. -Olof On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:04:51AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote: >> > Arnd, Olof, >> > >> > As requested, rebased on top of mvebu/drivers to resolve conflicts >> > internally. >> >> Sorry, I didn't have a chance to pull this in before the last -next >> before the merge window (which was already very late), so it'll have >> to wait for 3.13. Please send a fresh pull request of this branch once >> -rc1 is out. > > I'm sorry Olof, but I have to call bullshit. I originally sent this > pull-request on August 14th (3 _weeks_ ago): > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg267243.html > > I heard crickets until your reply on August 29th (2 _weeks_ later): > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg270826.html > > Which I respun and resent within a day on August 30th: > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg271170.html > > > Also, these patches were in -next for at least a week _before_ I sent my > first pull request on August 14th. So they've been tested for > _four_weeks_ ... > > I understand you're busy with other work, like all of us, but it would > seem that the baton passing between you, Arnd, and Kevin could use some > tweaking. > > The situation is the exact same for the dove branch. > > > :( > > Jason.
Olof, On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 09:21:51AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > Jason, > > No code is lost, no code is rejected, it's just going to wait for 3.13. Ack. Bummed, but Ack. > Stirring up drama over this is just going to be counterproductive for > all parties. I'm pissed, but I'm not a school girl. I can't read your mind (or Arnd's for that matter). So if I don't hear anything from you guys, I have to assume that my pulls are ok. Usually one of you pokes me within a few days if something is wrong. Had that happened, we wouldn't be here right now. So, my more rational response to this is: How do we prevent this in the future? If I don't hear anything from you in a few days, should I poke Arnd/Kevin to take a look at it? I'm not really keen on making noise like that by default. Any other ideas? thx, Jason. > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:04:51AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > >> > Arnd, Olof, > >> > > >> > As requested, rebased on top of mvebu/drivers to resolve conflicts > >> > internally. > >> > >> Sorry, I didn't have a chance to pull this in before the last -next > >> before the merge window (which was already very late), so it'll have > >> to wait for 3.13. Please send a fresh pull request of this branch once > >> -rc1 is out. > > > > I'm sorry Olof, but I have to call bullshit. I originally sent this > > pull-request on August 14th (3 _weeks_ ago): > > > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg267243.html > > > > I heard crickets until your reply on August 29th (2 _weeks_ later): > > > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg270826.html > > > > Which I respun and resent within a day on August 30th: > > > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg271170.html > > > > > > Also, these patches were in -next for at least a week _before_ I sent my > > first pull request on August 14th. So they've been tested for > > _four_weeks_ ... > > > > I understand you're busy with other work, like all of us, but it would > > seem that the baton passing between you, Arnd, and Kevin could use some > > tweaking. > > > > The situation is the exact same for the dove branch. > > > > > > :( > > > > Jason. > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > Usually one of you pokes me within a few days if something is wrong. > Had that happened, we wouldn't be here right now. Yes, we usually try to be quicker at doing merges. We had a few that took quite long this merge cycle. Summer breaks, travel, and maintainer handoff and getting up to speed are all factors in that. > So, my more rational response to this is: How do we prevent this in the > future? If I don't hear anything from you in a few days, should I poke > Arnd/Kevin to take a look at it? I'm not really keen on making noise > like that by default. Any other ideas? Always send your merge requests to arm@kernel.org, that way everybody gets them. Just as the rule of thumb with patches, if you haven't heard back within a week, please ping us to see if we missed it. Especially true when -rc7 rolls around. Send those pings to the same alias. It's possible that we handed off between each other so that the other person is handling merge requests at that time, but you don't have to worry about that if you use the alias. -Olof
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 10:47:01AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > > > Usually one of you pokes me within a few days if something is wrong. > > Had that happened, we wouldn't be here right now. > > Yes, we usually try to be quicker at doing merges. We had a few that > took quite long this merge cycle. Summer breaks, travel, and > maintainer handoff and getting up to speed are all factors in that. Fair enough. > > So, my more rational response to this is: How do we prevent this in the > > future? If I don't hear anything from you in a few days, should I poke > > Arnd/Kevin to take a look at it? I'm not really keen on making noise > > like that by default. Any other ideas? > > Always send your merge requests to arm@kernel.org, that way everybody > gets them. Hmm... This is the first I heard of that alias. I've always sent to both of you (Arnd and Olof) regardless of who looked to be more active. I'll add that to my alias list. > Just as the rule of thumb with patches, if you haven't heard back > within a week, please ping us to see if we missed it. Especially true > when -rc7 rolls around. > > Send those pings to the same alias. It's possible that we handed off > between each other so that the other person is handling merge requests > at that time, but you don't have to worry about that if you use the > alias. Will do. thx, Jason.
Arnd, Olof, As requested, rebased on top of mvebu/drivers to resolve conflicts internally. thx, Jason. The following changes since commit 654ca4e5273bda7feccb47470b0e75ee2ce2cb69: Merge branch 'mvebu/msi_pci' into mvebu/msi_mvebu (2013-08-30 19:55:09 +0000) are available in the git repository at: git://git.infradead.org/linux-mvebu.git tags/msi-mvebu-3.12 for you to fetch changes up to 8a047d867f271d1d0d97313134432929530d46c4: ARM: mvebu: link PCIe controllers to the MSI controller (2013-08-30 19:59:24 +0000) ---------------------------------------------------------------- mvebu-specific msi changes for v3.12 - enable MSI on PCI for mvebu V2: - rebase on top of mvebu/drivers Depends: - mvebu/drivers (tag drivers-3.12) - mvebu/msi_pci (tag msi-3.12) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas Petazzoni (5): irqchip: armada-370-xp: properly request resources irqchip: armada-370-xp: implement MSI support ARM: mvebu: the MPIC now provides MSI controller features PCI: mvebu: add support for MSI ARM: mvebu: link PCIe controllers to the MSI controller .../devicetree/bindings/arm/armada-370-xp-mpic.txt | 3 + .../devicetree/bindings/pci/mvebu-pci.txt | 3 + arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-370-xp.dtsi | 1 + arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-370.dtsi | 1 + arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-xp-mv78230.dtsi | 1 + arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-xp-mv78260.dtsi | 1 + arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-xp-mv78460.dtsi | 1 + drivers/irqchip/irq-armada-370-xp.c | 202 ++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/pci/host/pci-mvebu.c | 26 +++ 9 files changed, 234 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)