On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:01:26AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
> Gentle Ping!
>
I will take a look at this later this week. That said, I am unable be
gauge the urgency based on you ping here. You have shown the same urgency
last time for a feature that I queued promptly just to know that it was
abandon within couple of days. So I don't want to rush here simply based
on the number of pings here. I need to understand that it is really that
important. For now, I am thinking of skipping even v6.7 just to allow
some time for Qcom to make up its mind and be absolutely sure this is what
they *really* want this time.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 04:15:52PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:01:26AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
> > Gentle Ping!
> >
>
> I will take a look at this later this week. That said, I am unable be
> gauge the urgency based on you ping here. You have shown the same urgency
> last time for a feature that I queued promptly just to know that it was
> abandon within couple of days. So I don't want to rush here simply based
> on the number of pings here. I need to understand that it is really that
> important. For now, I am thinking of skipping even v6.7 just to allow
> some time for Qcom to make up its mind and be absolutely sure this is what
> they *really* want this time.
Hi Sudeep,
Red Hat is interested in this patch set. Qualcomm is moving one of their
automotive platforms over to use SCMI and this will appear in that
product.
Brian
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 11:54:25AM -0400, Brian Masney wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 04:15:52PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:01:26AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
> > > Gentle Ping!
> > >
> >
> > I will take a look at this later this week. That said, I am unable be
> > gauge the urgency based on you ping here. You have shown the same urgency
> > last time for a feature that I queued promptly just to know that it was
> > abandon within couple of days. So I don't want to rush here simply based
> > on the number of pings here. I need to understand that it is really that
> > important. For now, I am thinking of skipping even v6.7 just to allow
> > some time for Qcom to make up its mind and be absolutely sure this is what
> > they *really* want this time.
>
> Hi Sudeep,
>
> Red Hat is interested in this patch set. Qualcomm is moving one of their
> automotive platforms over to use SCMI and this will appear in that
> product.
>
Thanks Brian, I trust Redhat over Qcom ????. I will try to review and enable
progress later this week. We can try to target next merge window.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
On 9/19/2023 1:56 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 11:54:25AM -0400, Brian Masney wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 04:15:52PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:01:26AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>>>> Gentle Ping!
>>>>
>>> I will take a look at this later this week. That said, I am unable be
>>> gauge the urgency based on you ping here. You have shown the same urgency
>>> last time for a feature that I queued promptly just to know that it was
>>> abandon within couple of days. So I don't want to rush here simply based
>>> on the number of pings here. I need to understand that it is really that
>>> important. For now, I am thinking of skipping even v6.7 just to allow
>>> some time for Qcom to make up its mind and be absolutely sure this is what
>>> they *really* want this time.
>> Hi Sudeep,
>>
>> Red Hat is interested in this patch set. Qualcomm is moving one of their
>> automotive platforms over to use SCMI and this will appear in that
>> product.
>>
> Thanks Brian, I trust Redhat over Qcom ????. I will try to review and enable
> progress later this week. We can try to target next merge window.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep
Gentle Ping...
On Mon, Oct 02, 2023 at 10:31:27AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>
> On 9/19/2023 1:56 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 11:54:25AM -0400, Brian Masney wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 04:15:52PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:01:26AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
> > > > > Gentle Ping!
> > > > >
> > > > I will take a look at this later this week. That said, I am unable be
> > > > gauge the urgency based on you ping here. You have shown the same urgency
> > > > last time for a feature that I queued promptly just to know that it was
> > > > abandon within couple of days. So I don't want to rush here simply based
> > > > on the number of pings here. I need to understand that it is really that
> > > > important. For now, I am thinking of skipping even v6.7 just to allow
> > > > some time for Qcom to make up its mind and be absolutely sure this is what
> > > > they *really* want this time.
> > > Hi Sudeep,
> > >
> > > Red Hat is interested in this patch set. Qualcomm is moving one of their
> > > automotive platforms over to use SCMI and this will appear in that
> > > product.
> > >
> > Thanks Brian, I trust Redhat over Qcom ????. I will try to review and enable
> > progress later this week. We can try to target next merge window.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Sudeep
> Gentle Ping...
Sorry for the delay, both me and Cristian looking at this now.
--
Regards,
Sudeep