[GIT PULL] exynos-drm-next

[Inki Dae]

2014-04-04 17:05 GMT+09:00, Tomasz Figa <t.figa at samsung.com>:
> 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.
>

That was times enough to me, one month! And that is for easy to
maintain this patch sets.

>>>
>>> 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/
>

Yes, that was what I missed. I should have cced above people. Ok, will
remove the supernode feature from next tree.

> Best regards,
> Tomasz
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>