Hi Will, Thanks for the feedback! On 01/11/2021 17:36, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 10:18:35AM +0800, Xuesong Chen wrote: >> How about the status of this series, it's really bad, bad and still bad... to wait long >> time for the final judgement, especially you take extremely serious to rework it round >> by round, finaly you receive nothing. Everyone's work should be repected! > > I've trimmed the rest of your response as it wasn't especially constructive. > Please can you try to keep things civil, even when you're frustrated? It's > not very pleasant being on the end of a rant. I'm very sorry about the non-constructived response, and I'd like to take this chance to withdraw them entirely... personally this is not a good example in terms of the mood or the way of expression. > > One likely explanation for you not getting a reply on your patches is that > I've discovered many of your emails have ended up in my spam, for some > reason. I'm using gmail for my inbox so, if Bjorn is doing that as well, > then there's a good chance he hasn't seen them either. > > The other thing to keep in mind is that the 5.16 merge window opened today > and you posted the latest version of your patches on Wednesday. That doesn't > really leave enough time for the patches to be reviewed (noting that patch 3 > is new in this version and the kernel build robot was still complaining on > Friday), queued and put into linux-next, so I would suspect that this series > is looking more like 5.17 material and therefore not a priority for > maintainers at the moment. > > Your best is probably to post a v5, with the kbuild warnings addressed, > when -rc1 is released in a couple of weeks. I'm not sure how to fix the > spam issue though :( I've noticed the kbuild warning by the robot, so I plan to fix it and post the v5 soon. Thanks, Xuesong > > Will >
