On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:20:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:13 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 7/24/20 1:12 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:20 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > >> I think we need to NACK all attempts to add ACPI support to phylib and > > >> phylink until an authoritative ACPI Linux maintainer makes an > > >> appearance and actively steers the work. And not just this patchset, > > >> but all patchsets in the networking domain which have an ACPI > > >> component. > > > > > > It's funny, since I see ACPI mailing list and none of the maintainers > > > in the Cc here... > > > I'm not sure they pay attention to some (noise-like?) activity which > > > (from their perspective) happens on unrelated lists. > > > > If you what you describe here is their perception of what is going on > > here, that is very encouraging, we are definitively going to make progress. > > I can't speak for them. As a maintainer in other areas I expect that > people Cc explicitly maintainer(s) if they want more attention. > Otherwise I look at the mails to the mailing list just from time to > time. But this is my expectation, don't take me wrong. Sorry about this miss. In some past patch-set, I had added Rafael but somehow missed him this time. >From the "MAINTAINERS" file, I got two maintainers. I don't know who else can help with this discussion. I'll add others whom I know from ACPI list. M: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> M: Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx> If you know others who can help, please add. Hi ACPI experts, Would you please help review this patchset and guide us. Please see the discussion on this patchset here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20200715090400.4733-1-calvin.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t Thanks Calvin
