[PATCH v3 01/22] drm: Add GEM backed framebuffer library

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Daniel,

On Wednesday 16 Aug 2017 23:06:30 Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:03 PM, Noralf Trønnes <noralf at tronnes.org> wrote:
> > Den 16.08.2017 22.39, skrev Laurent Pinchart:
> >> On Wednesday 16 Aug 2017 21:52:02 Noralf Trønnes wrote:
> >>> Den 16.08.2017 19.24, skrev Eric Anholt:
> >>>> Noralf Trønnes <noralf at tronnes.org> writes:
> >>>>> This library provides helpers for drivers that don't subclass
> >>>>> drm_framebuffer and are backed by drm_gem_object. The code is
> >>>>> taken from drm_fb_cma_helper.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Noralf Trønnes <noralf at tronnes.org>
> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> +/**
> >>>>> + * drm_gem_fb_destroy - Free GEM backed framebuffer
> >>>>> + * @fb: DRM framebuffer
> >>>>> + *
> >>>>> + * Frees a GEM backed framebuffer with it's backing buffer(s) and the
> >>>>> structure
> >>>> 
> >>>> grammar nit: "its"
> >>>> 
> >>>> Other than that,
> >>>> 
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net>
> >>> 
> >>> Thanks, applied to drm-misc.
> >> 
> >> The patches were posted on Sunday. If you don't give at least a week to
> >> reviewers, I don't think they will keep bothering. I certainly won't.
> > 
> > Hi Laurent,
> > 
> > I actually didn't think there was much interest in this patchset since
> > the first version of the patcheset was sent 31/7. Daniel gave me his rb
> > if I fixed the docs a week ago. Instead of applying it directly I sent
> > a new version to give Eric a chance to look at it since he showed
> > interest in an rfc. So when I got his rb, I just applied.
> > 
> > All that being said, I do appreciate reviews since that improves the work.
> > I will adapt to waiting a week if that's what's expected.
> > 
> > Sorry about the let down.
> 
> I think a follow up patch to address the review would be good.
> 
> On the "how long to wait for review" question we just discussed this a
> bit on irc, and I kinda would have merged it probably too.

I think we've had a similar discussion before (but possibly in private, I'm 
not sure), and I believe that one week is a reasonable delay. That being said 
I understand what happened here, and I too get impatient to merge patches when 
I believe they're almost ready and just need one final ack.

> Perhaps pinged Laurent on irc since he's written/reviewed a bunch of cma
> patches. Aside: Being on irc would be good, makes it quicker to
> discuss stuff like this if you're around.

Please, let's not expect developers to be available to discuss patches on IRC 
in the middle of the night ;-)

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart