Re: [PATCH] ptp: don't include ptp_clock_kernel.h in spi.h

[Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 12:32:25 +0000 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 07:56:21PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 12:30:12 +0100 Mark Brown wrote:  
> 
> > > Please submit patches using subject lines reflecting the style for the
> > > subsystem, this makes it easier for people to identify relevant patches.
> > > Look at what existing commits in the area you're changing are doing and
> > > make sure your subject lines visually resemble what they're doing.
> > > There's no need to resubmit to fix this alone.  
> 
> > Mark, was this ever applied? I don't see it in linux-next.  
> 
> If it's not in -next it's not been applied.  This is one of the hazards
> of sending things with random subject lines, they get buried and missed
> much more easily...
> 
> Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
> for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so 
> on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes)
> please allow at least a couple of weeks for review.  If there have been
> review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed.
> 
> Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at
> all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed
> directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches
> anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are
> some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches
> for the subsystem are normally handled.

I think it's best if I take this patch via networking, then. It's
trivial and the merge window is afoot, anyway.