[GIT PULL] exynos-drm-next

[Tomasz Figa]

On 04.04.2014 09:48, Inki Dae wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tomasz Figa [mailto:t.figa at samsung.com]
>> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 4:29 PM
>> To: Inki Dae; 'Tomasz Figa'; airlied at linux.ie; dri-
>> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; 'Marek Szyprowski';
>> devicetree at vger.kernel.org; Grant Likely; Rob Herring
>> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] exynos-drm-next
>>
>> On 04.04.2014 07:34, Inki Dae wrote:
>>> Hi Tomasz,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Tomasz Figa [mailto:tomasz.figa at gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 2:00 PM
>>>> To: inki.dae at samsung.com; airlied at linux.ie; dri-
>>>> devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] exynos-drm-next
>>>>
>>>> Hi Inki,
>>>>
>>>> On 03.04.2014 19:34, inki.dae at samsung.com wrote:
>>>>> Hi Dave,
>>>>>       Sorry for late.
>>>>>       This pull request includes MIPI-DSI driver, two panel drivers,
>>>>>       super device support, and relevant dt bindings.
>>>>>
>>>>> Summaries:
>>>>> - Add MIPI-DSI Driver, and dt bindigs
>>>>> - Add S6E8AA0 MIPI-DSI based panel drivers, and dt bindings
>>>>> - Add LD9040 parallel panel driver
>>>>>      . this driver is placed in drivers/gpu/drm/panel, and it seems
>>>>>        to be used for exynos drm as of now,
>>>>> - Add super device support, and dt bindings
>>>>>      . this patch resolves the probe order issue to sub drivers
>>>>>        without specific lists
>>>>
>>>> I don't think the DT bindings have been Acked by DT maintainers,
>>>> which is necessary to merge them.
>>>>
>>>> Also I believe more discussion is needed on this, but I didn't have
>>>> time to comment on this series yet. Please hold off with merging the
>>>> supernode series yet.
>>>
>>> I sent a email about review request to you but I didn't get any answer
>>> from you.
>>
>> It's been just three days ago and I just didn't find time yet to review
>
> No, the email was just ping. My original RFC patch series had been posted
> March 3, about 1 month ago, And for my official patch series, eight days
> ago.
> So the email I sent three days ago was just a ping that I requested for you
> to review the patch series.

As I said, it was not even posted to samsung-soc, the central ML for 
Samsung SoC related patches, as mandated by MAINTAINERS file. I learned 
about its presence just after your ping.

>> them. I would like to be able to review all the patches straight after
>> them being posted, but unfortunately that's not the only thing I have to
>> do.
>>
>
> So I think there was no any comments from you for a long time.
>
>> Anyway, a common practice in open source world is to let the patches wait
>> on the mailing lists for two weeks for people to find some time to review
>> them and only then apply. There might be people that don't work full time
>> on this area, but still would be interested to do a review in some free
>> time.
>>
>> Also, neither version of this series have been posted to linux-samsung-soc
>> mailing list, which is also a key to have a broader review. Note that this
>> ML is listed in MAINTAINERS file for all kernel files with "exynos" in
>> name.
>>
>> ARM/S5P EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES
>> M:      Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim at samsung.com>
>> L:      linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org (moderated for
> non-subscribers)
>> L:      linux-samsung-soc at vger.kernel.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
>> S:      Maintained
>> F:      arch/arm/mach-s5p*/
>> F:      arch/arm/mach-exynos*/
>> N:      exynos
>>
>>
>>> And I think super node concept was already accepted, and relevant
>>> codes, component framework, has already been merged to mainline. And
>>> Linux staging next has already such dt bindings. Please see imx dts
>> files.
>>
>> Yes, they are, but for other platforms not this particular instance.
>>
>> Any new DT bindings introduced are needed to have an ACK from one of DT
>> maintainers to be merged, unless you can't get any reply from any of them
>> for a longer time, usually 3 weeks from posting the series to be applied.
>
> So should I wait for more times?
>

Since this series is not a dependency for any other patches queued for 
this release and it doesn't add any new functionality, I don't think 
there is any need to hurry with it.

>>
>> Of course standard pinging rules apply, so you should ping DT maintainers
>> first before applying such series.
>
>
> The email I sent to you three days ago was that.

Unfortunately I'm not a DT maintainer, so I don't qualify here. You can 
see list of DT maintainers in MAINTAINERS file:

OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS
M:      Rob Herring <robh+dt at kernel.org>
M:      Pawel Moll <pawel.moll at arm.com>
M:      Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
M:      Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree at hellion.org.uk>
M:      Kumar Gala <galak at codeaurora.org>
L:      devicetree at vger.kernel.org
S:      Maintained
F:      Documentation/devicetree/
F:      arch/*/boot/dts/
F:      include/dt-bindings/

Best regards,
Tomasz