Date:   Mon, 20 Mar 2023 13:34:31 +0000
From:   Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
        Colin Foster <colin.foster@in-advantage.com>,
        linux-phy@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/9] phy: phy-ocelot-serdes: add ability to
 be used in a non-syscon configuration
Message-ID: <20230320133431.GB2673958@google.com>
References: <20230317185415.2000564-1-colin.foster@in-advantage.com>
 <20230317185415.2000564-2-colin.foster@in-advantage.com>
 <ZBgeKM50e1vt+ho1@matsya>
 <ZBgmXplfA/Q3/1dC@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <ZBgmXplfA/Q3/1dC@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 02:19:44PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 17-03-23, 11:54, Colin Foster wrote:
> > > The phy-ocelot-serdes module has exclusively been used in a syscon setup,
> > > from an internal CPU. The addition of external control of ocelot switches
> > > via an existing MFD implementation means that syscon is no longer the only
> > > interface that phy-ocelot-serdes will see.
> > >
> > > In the MFD configuration, an IORESOURCE_REG resource will exist for the
> > > device. Utilize this resource to be able to function in both syscon and
> > > non-syscon configurations.
> >
> > Applied to phy/next, thanks
>
> Please read the netdev FAQ. Patches sent to netdev contain the tree that
> the submitter wishes the patches to be applied to.
>
> As a result, I see davem has just picked up the *entire* series which
> means that all patches are in net-next now. net-next is immutable.
>
> In any case, IMHO if this kind of fly-by cherry-picking from patch
> series is intended, it should be mentioned during review to give a
> chance for other maintainers to respond and give feedback. Not all
> submitters will know how individual maintainers work. Not all
> maintainers know how other maintainers work.

Once again netdev seems to have applied patches from other subsystems
without review/ack.  What makes netdev different to any other kernel
subsystem?  What would happen if other random maintainers started
applying netdev patches without appropriate review?  I suspect someone
would become understandably grumpy.

--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]