Hello Stephen, On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 10:01:44AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 07:14:34PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 10:21:23PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > > given that I don't succeed in getting any feedback for my patch set, I'm > > > trying with a pull request today. It would be really great if this pull > > > request made it finally in for the next merge window. > > > > It seems sending a pull request didn't help either :-\ > > > > I'm waiting since October for feedback, several people expressed to like > > this series and I want to make use of it to simplify a few drivers. I'm > > quite annoyed that your missing feedback blocks me from further > > improving stuff. > > There is still no feedback, not even something like: "I saw your > nagging, sorry. I'm drown in other missions, please have some more > patience." > > I assume it's not to much to expect at least such a reply after more > than 8 months? The next merge window is over now. The pull request still merges fine into v5.14-rc2. I'm still convinced it adds some benefit and I want to use it to simplify a bunch of drivers. But I cannot without this being merged. Do I have to consider creating these functions in the pwm namespace to continue here? This cannot be the right thing to do?! Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
