David Lin <yu-hao.lin@xxxxxxx> writes: > I found Nxpwifi patch v2 is put in "Deferred" state quickly. The way I use patchwork states is described here: https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#checking_state_of_patches_from_patchwork Basically I try to follow the "Inbox Zero" method and keep the amount of patches in New state (my "inbox") low and the Deferred state is my todo list. > Patch v2 is mainly to address the comments from Johannes and it > actually took quite some efforts. We understand there are areas to > improve and we are committed to continue enhance/maintain the driver. > > Could you let me know your plan for reviewing Nxpwifi? Reviewing new drivers take a lot of time, at the moment I'm following what other reviewers say before I'll look at it myself. The process is so slow and patience is needed. The last thing I want to see that once the driver is accepted NXP disappears and we end up having an unmaintained driver. Way too many companies do that. > Is there anything we can do to move this forward? Yes, get involved with the community and help us, don't just expect that we do everything for you gratis. Especially helping Brian with mwifiex review/testing helps us (we get a better driver) and also helps you (you learn how the community works and you gain trust in the community). An excellent example is Realtek. Few years back Realtek was not involved with upstream development at all. But now Ping is doing an awesome job with maintaining ALL Realtek drivers, including the old drivers, and I even trust him so much that I pull directly from this tree. This is what NXP should aim for. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
