On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 10:56:17 -0800, you wrote: >You asked me a simple question regarding whether or not adding the >cpuidle.off=1 argument was a problem, and I responded. I was not >expecting and I am not interested in a flame war or getting another >bashing and lecture as to your personal interests, In fairness to Peter, I don't believe his intention (nor did I perceive it as such) was for a flame war. Nor was it a lecture about his personal interests. Please also remember that in a lot of cases a reply is not just aimed at you, but to the "silent" masses who are reading the mailing list but not actively participating. In shorter form, what I understood was: a) given the lack of followed standards, and the attitudes of the SOC vendors, these small ARM boards are a mess - not news to most people who have been following the situation, but likely new information for some. b) pointing out that there is no paid person working for Fedora with a lab full of all of these different boards - again, likely new information to some. c) that the Fedora ARM experience is directly connected with how much effort the Fedora ARM community puts into it. In this case, yes that cpuidle requirement likely should be documented, but ideally by someone who actually has that SOC and thus can be sure that it is actually required and (in an ideal world) periodically test any future updates to see if it is still required and update the wiki if necessary. As Peter does not have an Odroid, he is not the best person to be doing that even if he did have the available time. Thus, in general, and again not necessarily aimed at you: I am sure that Peter would like the Fedora ARM experience to be better, but if the community wants things to improve then it will be necessary for the community to put in the effort in testing, debugging, and documenting. _______________________________________________ arm mailing list -- arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
