On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 07:18:45PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 11:34:59PM +0530, Amit Tomer wrote: > > > From what I can tell, these patches are not for the kernel. The > > > filenames don't match th kernel layout. > > > > These files looks to be from U-boot, and must be intended for U-boot > > as I see U-boot mailing address in recipient's address? > > So why is it copied to: > > devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - a kernel mailing list > linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - the main kernel mailing list > linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - the gpio driver kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - the ARM kernel mailing list > > Given that it includes four kernel mailing lists (ok, devicetree > may be argued to have a wider application), then I don't think the > conclusion that "it's for u-boot, because there's _one_ u-boot > mailing list in the recipients" is particularly obvious. > > The author really needs to state that up front if they're sending > it to a wide audeience, rather than leaving people to guess, thereby > potentially wasting their time. > > Not only did Andrew review the patch as if it were for the kernel, > but I also wasted time on this as well when I double-took the > ifdefs, and wanted to check the current driver in the kernel. Oh, and... u-boot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx bounces because that domain is not resolvable - I guess that is internal to NXP, and this patch should have remained within NXP and not been posted publically. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 10.2Mbps down 587kbps up
