Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201113161859.1775473-1-david.m.ertman@intel.com>
 <20201113161859.1775473-2-david.m.ertman@intel.com> <20201117053000.GM47002@unreal>
 <X7N1naYOXodPsP/I@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <X7N1naYOXodPsP/I@kroah.com>
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Nov 2020 13:04:56 -0800
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4jXinvaLgtdpXTLLQ3sDOhvoBjF=7v7pba5rAd0g_rdow@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/10] Add auxiliary bus support
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>,
        Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@intel.com>,
        alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        linux-rdma <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com>,
        Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>,
        Fred Oh <fred.oh@linux.intel.com>,
        Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>,
        "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@intel.com>,
        "Patil, Kiran" <kiran.patil@intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 11:02 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 07:30:00AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 08:18:50AM -0800, Dave Ertman wrote:
> > > Add support for the Auxiliary Bus, auxiliary_device and auxiliary_driver.
> > > It enables drivers to create an auxiliary_device and bind an
> > > auxiliary_driver to it.
> > >
> > > The bus supports probe/remove shutdown and suspend/resume callbacks.
> > > Each auxiliary_device has a unique string based id; driver binds to
> > > an auxiliary_device based on this id through the bus.
> > >
> > > Co-developed-by: Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@intel.com>
> > > Co-developed-by: Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com>
> > > Co-developed-by: Fred Oh <fred.oh@linux.intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Fred Oh <fred.oh@linux.intel.com>
> > > Co-developed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Shiraz Saleem <shiraz.saleem@intel.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@intel.com>
> > > ---
> >
> > Greg,
> >
> > This horse was beaten to death, can we please progress with this patch?
> > Create special topic branch or ack so I'll prepare this branch.
> >
> > We are in -rc4 now and we (Mellanox) can't hold our submissions anymore.
> > My mlx5_core probe patches [1] were too intrusive and they are ready to
> > be merged, Parav's patches got positive review as well [2] and will be
> > taken next.
> >
> > We delayed and have in our internal queues the patches for VDPA, eswitch
> > and followup for mlx5_core probe rework, but trapped due to this AUX bus
> > patch.
>
> There are no deadlines for kernel patches here, sorry.  Give me some
> time to properly review this, core kernel changes should not be rushed.
>
> Also, if you really want to blame someone for the delay, look at the
> patch submitters not the reviewers, as they are the ones that took a
> very long time with this over the lifecycle of this patchset, not me.  I
> have provided many "instant" reviews of this patchset, and then months
> went by between updates from them.

Please stop this finger pointing. It was already noted that the team,
out of abundance of caution / deference to the process, decided not to
push the patches while I was out on family leave. It's cruel to hold
that against them, and if anyone is to blame it's me for not
clarifying it was ok to proceed while I was out.