On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 5:48 PM Pali Rohár <pali@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thursday 23 February 2023 14:22:52 Lee Jones wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 26 Dec 2022, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > > > > Allow to define inverted logic (0 - enable LED, 1 - disable LED) via > > > > active-low property. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/register-bit-led.yaml | 5 +++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > > > Needs a DT Ack (now Cc:ed) > > > > I can't do anything with this set until we have a DT Ack. > > > > If you don't receive one soon, I'd suggest resending the set again with > > all of the DT people on Cc that it should have been sent to in the first > > place. > > (Re)Sending one email multiple times is against email etiquette, > moreover it is spam technique and reason for marking sender on the > blacklist. No problem on the kernel mailing lists actually, we love to mail bomb each other here. Yeah maybe we are a bit weird :/ > Moreover I have already sent it more than one time. DT people are known > to not respond to patches and pull requests and I have no motivation to > send reminder emails for them for more than half of year. > > So I would suggest to not send emails to people who just do not want to > receive or read emails. It is logical reaction. > > This patch is here for more than 6 months, so I do not see reason why to > wait for Godot. Rather move forward than stepping at the same position. I understand that it is annoying. In my experience Krzysztof and Rob (now added on To) are usually quite responsive and helpful, so something must have made them miss it I think. As subsystem maintainer, if the DT reviewers haven't said anything in ~2 weeks I tend to sanity check the binding as best I can and then merge it. The bigger and more complex it is the more hesitant I get to do this... Yours, Linus Walleij
