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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] FPGA DFL Changes for 5.12
To:     Moritz Fischer <mdf@kernel.org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, moritzf@google.com,
        Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@gmail.com>,
        Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@huawei.com>,
        Russ Weight <russell.h.weight@intel.com>,
        "Gerlach, Matthew" <matthew.gerlach@intel.com>,
        Sonal Santan <sonal.santan@xilinx.com>,
        Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@intel.com>,
        Richard Gong <richard.gong@intel.com>
References: <X/sz6lDq8WFzrRUJ@archbook>
 <95af46d6-d123-f610-2f21-6d6de6f248e9@redhat.com>
 <X/v2xs5Rnfw9F18E@kroah.com>
 <9bc01a73-726f-a979-1246-6ea048961670@redhat.com>
 <X/xmi/jJmDHnV5/N@kroah.com>
 <7923d9dc-c503-5318-6e4f-931f8c13c1be@redhat.com>
 <X/x4QjGyP8ssYUDI@kroah.com>
 <fe9739cf-abc9-c0c6-933e-8447a9d197a8@redhat.com>
 <X/yXOFYnQcA1MsUd@kroah.com>
 <dccc8075-b900-8680-3620-8050475858a7@redhat.com> <X/y0+ZCPsfrg/LUp@archbook>
From:   Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <ac1fd7f4-f53a-ddc4-192b-8c8af254f7ee@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:39:36 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <X/y0+ZCPsfrg/LUp@archbook>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk


On 1/11/21 12:28 PM, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> Tom,
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 11:46:03AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
>
> [..]
>> I have been doing the first review in a couple of days after every patch landing.
> I appreciate your help with doing reviews.
>  
>> I see some pretty good response from the developers to fix the issues raised.Ã‚Â 
> ... yet patches have been rejected. So it doesn't seem purely a matter
> of throughput?
>
>> But I do not see Moritz picking up the review until weeks later.
> I'll admit there are delays that happen, I have a dayjob as I pointed
> out in earlier conversations. Furthermore, just because I do not
> immediately send out an email does not mean I don't look at stuff.
>
> If people show up with 100kLOC patchsets that don't pass checkpatch,
> it'll take a while for me to even read up and understand what they're
> doing / trying to do.
>
>> This consistent delay in timely reviews is a bottleneck.
> As Greg pointed out even ones that were reviewed got rejected, so
> clearly the issue is with the quality and not the speed at which we send
> them on.
>
>> It would be good if the big first reviews could be done in parallel.
> Again depending how the patchsets are structured it will take me a while
> to process. Having them re-use existing infrastructure, following
> coding and submission guidelines will speed up the process.
>
> On a personal level, being told I'm too slow and not doing my job as
> maintainer doesn't exactly increase my motivation to get to it ...

Sorry about that.

I really do want to help out, earlier you mentioned patchwork problems.

If you can point me at the wreckage, I'll take a look.

Tom


>
> - Moritz
>