| Message ID | 1694890416-14409-1-git-send-email-wentong.wu@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add Intel LJCA device driver | expand |
On 2023-09-16 19:53, Wentong Wu wrote: > Add driver for Intel La Jolla Cove Adapter (LJCA) device. This > IO-expander adds additional functions to the host system such > as GPIO, I2C and SPI with USB host interface. We add 4 drivers > to support this device: a USB driver, a GPIO chip driver, a I2C > controller driver and a SPI controller driver. Can I be a pain and ask you to limit the rate at which you repost this series? You send it every other day, hence actively discouraging people from reviewing it (why would they, there's another version coming). Once a week is a perfectly good rate, and would probably lead to better results. Alternatively, if you decide that you really want to keep sending it that often, please drop me from the Cc list. Thanks, M.
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 02:53:32AM +0800, Wentong Wu wrote: > Add driver for Intel La Jolla Cove Adapter (LJCA) device. This > IO-expander adds additional functions to the host system such > as GPIO, I2C and SPI with USB host interface. We add 4 drivers > to support this device: a USB driver, a GPIO chip driver, a I2C > controller driver and a SPI controller driver. > > --- > v19: > - add v17's change which v18 doesn't apply I don't understand this changelog line at all, what do you mean? > v18: > - rebase patch set on top of Linus' master branch (57d88e8a5974644039fbc47806bac7bb12025636) Why? What required this? As Marc says, you are sending this way too often. I'm going to move this to the bottom of my pile and get to it in a week or so as with the constant resends, there are way more changes that were sent before yours that need to be reviewed. thanks, greg k-h
Hi Marc, Greg, On 9/17/23 12:42, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 02:53:32AM +0800, Wentong Wu wrote: >> Add driver for Intel La Jolla Cove Adapter (LJCA) device. This >> IO-expander adds additional functions to the host system such >> as GPIO, I2C and SPI with USB host interface. We add 4 drivers >> to support this device: a USB driver, a GPIO chip driver, a I2C >> controller driver and a SPI controller driver. >> >> --- >> v19: >> - add v17's change which v18 doesn't apply > > I don't understand this changelog line at all, what do you mean? > >> v18: >> - rebase patch set on top of Linus' master branch (57d88e8a5974644039fbc47806bac7bb12025636) > > Why? What required this? I noticed that this did not apply cleanly (the SPI patch did not apply cleanly), so I asked for the next version to be based on 6.6-rc1 or Linus' master branch. Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. Regards, Hans
Hi Greg and Marc, It's my bad. I'm so sorry for this, and apologize for it here. And I thought you have lots of patches to review, so I just try to address all the issues currently I know before you start to review, so that my patch doesn't take over your bandwidth much. And now I understand your pain here, I will follow your advise going forward. Thanks Also thank @Hans de Goede for the help. Thanks BR, Wentong > From: Greg KH > > On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 02:53:32AM +0800, Wentong Wu wrote: > > Add driver for Intel La Jolla Cove Adapter (LJCA) device. This > > IO-expander adds additional functions to the host system such as GPIO, > > I2C and SPI with USB host interface. We add 4 drivers to support this > > device: a USB driver, a GPIO chip driver, a I2C controller driver and > > a SPI controller driver. > > > > --- > > v19: > > - add v17's change which v18 doesn't apply > > I don't understand this changelog line at all, what do you mean? In v18, I forgot to include v17's change, so resend with v19 immediately, sorry for this again. > > > v18: > > - rebase patch set on top of Linus' master branch > > (57d88e8a5974644039fbc47806bac7bb12025636) > > Why? What required this? This is just a rebase for you and other viewers review and apply the patch easily. Sorry again. BR, Wentong > > As Marc says, you are sending this way too often. I'm going to move this to the > bottom of my pile and get to it in a week or so as with the constant resends, > there are way more changes that were sent before yours that need to be > reviewed. > > thanks, > > greg k-h
On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but > I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead > of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has > send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. Hi, what to do now? It's been ten days. I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release or do we ask Greg to take it as is? This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver submission to be. As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. Hans? Greg? Regards Oliver
Hi, On 9/28/23 12:18, Oliver Neukum wrote: > On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but >> I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead >> of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has >> send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. > > Hi, > > what to do now? It's been ten days. > I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. > We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release > or do we ask Greg to take it as is? > This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver > submission to be. > > As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. > Hans? Greg? Note I have been mostly involved in testing these patches I have *not* thoroughly reviewed them. I have taken a quick(ish) look which did not find anything obviously wrong. I agree that at least patch 1/4 is ready for merging. I'm not sure if Greg should pick-up the entire series or if the rest should be merged through there relevant subsystems to also give the relevant subsys maintainer tree. For the series: Acked-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Regards, Hans
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 02:20:04PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 9/28/23 12:18, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > >> Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but > >> I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead > >> of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has > >> send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. > > > > Hi, > > > > what to do now? It's been ten days. > > I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. > > We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release > > or do we ask Greg to take it as is? > > This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver > > submission to be. > > > > As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. > > Hans? Greg? > > Note I have been mostly involved in testing these patches I have > *not* thoroughly reviewed them. I have taken a quick(ish) look > which did not find anything obviously wrong. > > I agree that at least patch 1/4 is ready for merging. I'm > not sure if Greg should pick-up the entire series or if > the rest should be merged through there relevant subsystems > to also give the relevant subsys maintainer tree. > > For the series: > > Acked-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> > Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Ok, I'll take a look at these again next week when I return home and catch up on my pending patch review queue. thanks for the review! greg k-h
Hi, On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 12:18:50PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but > > I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead > > of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has > > send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. > > Hi, > > what to do now? It's been ten days. > I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. > We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release > or do we ask Greg to take it as is? > This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver > submission to be. > > As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. > Hans? Greg? i2c is also good to go and the rest looks good, as well. I have some concerns on patch 4 that looks like a mixture of many random things. Andi
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 02:20:04PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > I agree that at least patch 1/4 is ready for merging. I'm > not sure if Greg should pick-up the entire series or if > the rest should be merged through there relevant subsystems > to also give the relevant subsys maintainer tree. I stopped paying attention when it was obvious that the USB stuff was struggling badly and getting lots of resends, I've not checked the SPI stuff in a while.
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 2:29 PM Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 12:18:50PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but > > > I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead > > > of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has > > > send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. > > > > Hi, > > > > what to do now? It's been ten days. > > I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. > > We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release > > or do we ask Greg to take it as is? > > This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver > > submission to be. > > > > As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. > > Hans? Greg? > > i2c is also good to go and the rest looks good, as well. I have > some concerns on patch 4 that looks like a mixture of many random > things. > > Andi It's got a lot of coding style fixes ninja-packed in there that are not mentioned by the commit message. But as it's been reviewed by Linus, acked by Andy (and myself) and tested by Hans, I'm ready to let it slide if that saves me from seeing ten additional versions of this series in my inbox. Bart