From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
dbaryshkov@gmail.com, dwmw2@infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] wdt: sunxi: Move restart code to the watchdog driver
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:01:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53A9A0CB.1020607@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140624144954.GP19730@lukather>
On 06/24/2014 07:49 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:13:24PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
>> Hi Maxime,
>>
>>>>> Guenter, since you seem to be the only responsive, may I suggest that
>>>>> you start merging patches and do a pull request to either Wim or Linus
>>>>> directly during the merge window?
>>>>>
>>>> I had prepared a pull request for Wim last weekend or so, but then there
>>>> were more patches piling in and I got distracted, so I didn't have time
>>>> to actually send it. I'll try again this weekend ... the kids should be
>>>> busy learning for their finals, and I'll have Friday and Monday off
>>>> from work, so I should be able to find the time.
>>>>
>>>> As for sending patches to Linus directly, well, Wim is the watchdog maintainer.
>>>> I manage to upset enough people, and would not want to add Wim to the list.
>>>>
>>>> The patches _are_ in my watchdog-next branch and get some coverage from
>>>> both my auto-builders and from Fenguang's build robots, so while they are
>>>> not in linux-next, they are not completely in the dark either.
>>>
>>> So, this patch finally didn't make it into 3.16. Great. Now, we can't
>>> even reboot the boards.
>>
>> 1) For me the discussion was not ended and needs further
>> thinking. (And I just read some good ideas about it).
>
> It would have been great for you to mention it then.
>
>> 2) You never mentioned you needed this in for 3.16 and that things
>> would break because of it.
>
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-May/257690.html
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-May/259109.html
>
> I thought it was pretty clear.
>
>>
>> So based on these 2 points why would I have to have put this in allready?
>>
>>> Given how it's just impossible to get something merged reliably
>>> through the watchdog tree, I guess I should just start merging the
>>> patches through mine?
>>
>> I agree that I have the problem of having only 24 hours in a day and
>> that I lack time to communicate and that I am not good at
>> communicating either, but I checked all sunxi related e-mails and
>> you never mentioned the constraint to have it in for 3.16... But I
>> do understand your frustration.
>
> I totally understand the lack of time. A good way to ease your burden
> and solve this situation is usually to take a co-maintainer. And given
> that Guenter already reviews patches, maintains some branch, and is
> developping some part of the framework, he seems up to the task.
>
Let's focus on the problem at hand. I prepared a set of patches to add a
kernel restart notifier, quite similar to the existing reboot notifier.
Only question is where it should reside. So far it is in parallel
to the reboot notifier, ie in kernel/notifier.c and kernel/reboot.c.
Before I send it out for review, I'd like to get a notion if this is
the right approach, or if it is going to create heat from other sides.
Thoughts, anyone ?
On the plus side, this might have the potential of replacing arm_pm_restart,
which I think would be a good thing.
Thanks,
Guenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linux@roeck-us.net (Guenter Roeck)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/6] wdt: sunxi: Move restart code to the watchdog driver
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:01:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53A9A0CB.1020607@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140624144954.GP19730@lukather>
On 06/24/2014 07:49 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:13:24PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
>> Hi Maxime,
>>
>>>>> Guenter, since you seem to be the only responsive, may I suggest that
>>>>> you start merging patches and do a pull request to either Wim or Linus
>>>>> directly during the merge window?
>>>>>
>>>> I had prepared a pull request for Wim last weekend or so, but then there
>>>> were more patches piling in and I got distracted, so I didn't have time
>>>> to actually send it. I'll try again this weekend ... the kids should be
>>>> busy learning for their finals, and I'll have Friday and Monday off
>>>> from work, so I should be able to find the time.
>>>>
>>>> As for sending patches to Linus directly, well, Wim is the watchdog maintainer.
>>>> I manage to upset enough people, and would not want to add Wim to the list.
>>>>
>>>> The patches _are_ in my watchdog-next branch and get some coverage from
>>>> both my auto-builders and from Fenguang's build robots, so while they are
>>>> not in linux-next, they are not completely in the dark either.
>>>
>>> So, this patch finally didn't make it into 3.16. Great. Now, we can't
>>> even reboot the boards.
>>
>> 1) For me the discussion was not ended and needs further
>> thinking. (And I just read some good ideas about it).
>
> It would have been great for you to mention it then.
>
>> 2) You never mentioned you needed this in for 3.16 and that things
>> would break because of it.
>
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-May/257690.html
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-May/259109.html
>
> I thought it was pretty clear.
>
>>
>> So based on these 2 points why would I have to have put this in allready?
>>
>>> Given how it's just impossible to get something merged reliably
>>> through the watchdog tree, I guess I should just start merging the
>>> patches through mine?
>>
>> I agree that I have the problem of having only 24 hours in a day and
>> that I lack time to communicate and that I am not good at
>> communicating either, but I checked all sunxi related e-mails and
>> you never mentioned the constraint to have it in for 3.16... But I
>> do understand your frustration.
>
> I totally understand the lack of time. A good way to ease your burden
> and solve this situation is usually to take a co-maintainer. And given
> that Guenter already reviews patches, maintains some branch, and is
> developping some part of the framework, he seems up to the task.
>
Let's focus on the problem at hand. I prepared a set of patches to add a
kernel restart notifier, quite similar to the existing reboot notifier.
Only question is where it should reside. So far it is in parallel
to the reboot notifier, ie in kernel/notifier.c and kernel/reboot.c.
Before I send it out for review, I'd like to get a notion if this is
the right approach, or if it is going to create heat from other sides.
Thoughts, anyone ?
On the plus side, this might have the potential of replacing arm_pm_restart,
which I think would be a good thing.
Thanks,
Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-24 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-07 2:44 [PATCH v2 0/6] ARM: sunxi: Machine code cleanup Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] wdt: sunxi: Move restart code to the watchdog driver Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 21:33 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-07 21:33 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-15 9:11 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-15 9:11 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-19 15:04 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-19 15:04 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-22 20:34 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-22 20:34 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-22 20:39 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-05-22 20:39 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-05-22 20:56 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-22 20:56 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-06-23 21:16 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2014-05-22 21:12 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-22 21:12 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-23 8:33 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-23 8:33 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-06-23 10:31 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-06-23 10:31 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-06-23 14:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-23 14:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-23 14:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-06-23 14:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-06-23 15:16 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-23 15:16 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-23 15:35 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-06-23 15:35 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-06-23 15:40 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-23 15:40 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-23 15:49 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-06-23 15:49 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-06-23 21:30 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2014-06-23 21:47 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-23 21:47 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-24 9:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-06-24 9:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-06-23 21:13 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2014-06-24 14:49 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-06-24 14:49 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-06-24 16:01 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2014-06-24 16:01 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-02 8:02 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2014-08-02 15:17 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-08-02 15:17 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-08-02 15:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-02 15:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-07 2:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] power: reset: Add Allwinner A31 reset code Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] ARM: sunxi: Remove reset code from the platform Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] ARM: sunxi: Remove init_machine callback Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] ARM: sunxi: Add A31 reset driver to sunxi_defconfig Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] ARM: multi_v7: Add Allwinner reset drivers to multi_v7_defconfig Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 2:44 ` Maxime Ripard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53A9A0CB.1020607@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=dbaryshkov@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
--cc=wim@iguana.be \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.