From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: Missing feedback Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 13:46:35 +0200 Message-ID: <20200522114635.GB2163848@ulmo> References: <20200522101355.x4td3ehkfhp636ft@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG" Return-path: Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56540 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728426AbgEVLqk (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 May 2020 07:46:40 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x629.google.com (mail-ej1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::629]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9EB4C061A0E for ; Fri, 22 May 2020 04:46:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x629.google.com with SMTP id d7so12666515eja.7 for ; Fri, 22 May 2020 04:46:39 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200522101355.x4td3ehkfhp636ft@pengutronix.de> Sender: linux-pwm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org To: Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de --LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 12:13:55PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K=C3=B6nig wrote: > Hello Thierry, >=20 > there is again quite a backlog of missing pwm feedback and missing care > for patchwork. >=20 > Patchwork has several iterations of a few patch series where the old > series should be marked as superseeded. If you want you can give me > write access there, then I can go through the list and mark patches > accordingly. (I'm user "ukleinek" on patchwork.ozlabs.org.) >=20 > Patches/mails where I'd like to see feedback (or just application) from > you include: >=20 > - "Convert PWM period and duty cycle to u64" series (v14, feedback) > - pwm: sun4i: direct clock output support for Allwinner A64 (v2,=20 > application) > - pwm: imx27: Fix rounding behavior > - docs: pwm: rework documentation for the framework > - adding linux-pwm archives to lore.kernel.org? >=20 > but I feel the backlog on the list is much bigger. >=20 > In the past I did less review on the list myself, partly because I > consider it frustrating to invest time and then still have patches lying > around without application/feedback. To be honest, I've been feeling this way for a number of years now. PWM isn't exactly very "hot" and it's difficult to get much of a reaction =66rom anyone. You do get a reaction when you apply patches that nobody's been willing to review or test and then they end up breaking things and people only notice when they're updating their product kernels to a new version and by that time it's becoming really difficult to fix things. On top of that I've been having trouble finding any time to spend on PWM maintenance because in addition to a fulltime job (which doesn't include PWM work) now I have two kids that need to be homeschooled. This may or may not get better in the weeks or months ahead. Now, don't get me wrong because I know there are plenty of other people that are struggling with the situation, so I know this is difficult for everyone. Just saying how things are for me and why I can barely find any time to spend on PWM. The lack of participation isn't very uncommon for subsystems such as PWM and I've seen other subsystem maintainers voice the same frustrations over the years. I'm not sure what a good solution to this is. Some have tried a group maintainership model with some success, at other times it might just be time for someone else to take over. To be honest, I have occasionally considered just abandonning PWM and let somebody else take over. Until recently this wasn't really an option because there was nobody else showing any interest and doing an okay job of it seemed like a better idea than orphaning and letting someone else with already too much work handle the patches. It's not like the review situation would improve that way either. > I think getting patchwork more up to date would already help > considerably, but in the long run I can also imagine taking care for > patch application and sending pull requests if this helps. I very much appreciate your help on reviewing patches. At the same time, even while you certainly have shown an interest in the PWM subsystem for a while, if you're already frustrated by the lack of progress, even though that may be partially my own fault, I'm not convinced the subsystem is going to be in much better hands if I were to leave it all to you. It sometimes may seem like a trivial job, but it's also very frustrating because people really only tend to get mad at you for any number of reasons. People take it for granted that you will be there to support them and offer little to no support in return. They will also sometimes completely overwhelm you with patches and won't even let you review patches before they send out new versions. What they don't realize is that that actually doesn't improve the situation because it keeps adding to your maintainer work queue. You mention patchwork, and while it's a great tool, having to go through it and mark all of those patch series that you haven't even looked at as "superseeded" is tedious work and takes away precious time that you can't use to actually do review. Anyway, I don't want to discourage you or anything, just want to give you a fair warning about the differences of being a contributor/reviewer and a maintainer. If you're really serious about being more active, do you have any concrete suggestions on what would help? Should we maybe start by giving you access to patchwork so that you can mark patches and keep it in a better state? Another option might be for us to share patch application, though that's honestly the least time-consuming part. Once patches are reviewed and ready, it's easy for me to apply and push out a new tree, so it's not like sharing the workload would be much help. Like I said, I'm open to let you take on a more central role eventually, but I'm going to need a bit more time to convince myself that you will be doing a better job than I. Thierry --LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEiOrDCAFJzPfAjcif3SOs138+s6EFAl7Hu5kACgkQ3SOs138+ s6EIPBAAu7RIX58wv716J+SwOa4s0AeeX0zz7bMethcNJSQMkT4wVZ9WV5Yivg9o Tb2iXL7Wwcuxp02k+cU/pO/Dm2ejmw5r6dgL1sdZSCjiTDDPQ8f12W2dzADFZhYP n4NZB2miwIE4Uu7vMDnNc9BSqY/W1vjgom+T1ZVabLiVJXjHWiojQ5Xg49m2S1ch 2XQWpos9Z6orqMBCSlwQfrCB2zxDljmDni8C3OPpnIYSCQm9vF5QB/c8P9Uu/xPi i9h+5ZssgirtxRlAol0xin4FWXn3vfRzk8RufFdviez47jteIyHaX898ngAdUTe3 UszDSxRVJUk1StdrM9f8pOONzUY1vdtVIr19YsGaMzaf7VciWvpcdO18dsp/SZb0 t8dV7CbXDc6MAApKgYqyILZS3Vt3OWj2lvNZJKAkWMAgmbfLgHXV+V1OmY378gih Y7h8af8A2jnKxQyO+Eh8hU2DQaodO4A3EA5/5wwdwgYqfhSX830sfRWJf02ec5Tr JgJ8jPGW3XHurhowQwff18Wx/2qbrC4xcIzlfnCds0VqBfZ9r90xGSDrjuu35gyw 0W+l2WXJ8MlyxPtNKcKKoj1Jsz1HmYovnwwEGcoAqaypKoo2CSBwEyPShrKO9Pp2 oraqwDK94L7AuopQmzXQTGgc9Jo3GELbNz7m8jo2FxHZbwxs+x0= =AAzv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG--