From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB5ABC43217 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:31:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229849AbiJTSbY (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:31:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36252 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229491AbiJTSbW (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:31:22 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CDE11FAE43; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 11:31:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 548B861C14; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:30:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6508AC433C1; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:30:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1666290656; bh=LidB1smPJLiSNxSiSTWkVKWdSRC18cTLNqF64oUkfHE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=azjdQmvVop6YiLzTrQi8TsKUZ/7QxA9UJU9hniriVRdmYQKs0Kr45m/eZyfjnnIp7 tVRAX4Sni6RDHmISP4DV5y22UqZDN+0BzClbPJ02ZgYpvak8uif5J/Ake4kifp4a08 T/8r30MLbpNA83fPAW+J4SAaHUuiGyybkotMkhQTRYtVPt1VZKzCdt4Zam/kwqDdQo o2M/tjJlu+SSh7f2g/xJO48QO9RbyfjY2x6KTtTUtWn65M8uojg9aSU8A+dRMX0DpD No8Sy0uTdgcwWpaxd30iebnWaKf333ZjQPf9xMjnwZMZoVbg3NduHZ7xiSm4XHb5ZH wQ5juq379qtdw== From: Jakub Kicinski To: davem@davemloft.net Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, Jakub Kicinski Subject: [PATCH net] docs: netdev: offer performance feedback to contributors Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 11:30:31 -0700 Message-Id: <20221020183031.1245964-1-kuba@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.37.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org Some of us gotten used to producing large quantities of peer feedback at work, every 3 or 6 months. Extending the same courtesy to community members seems like a logical step. It may be hard for some folks to get validation of how important their work is internally, especially at smaller companies which don't employ many kernel experts. The concept of "peer feedback" may be a hyperscaler / silicon valley thing so YMMV. Hopefully we can build more context as we go. Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski --- Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst index d14007081595..1fa5ab8754d3 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst @@ -319,3 +319,13 @@ unpatched tree to confirm infrastructure didn't mangle it. Finally, go back and read :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst ` to be sure you are not repeating some common mistake documented there. + +My company uses peer feedback in employee performance reviews. Can I ask netdev maintainers for feedback? +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +Yes, especially if you spend significant amount of time reviewing code +and go out of your way to improve shared infrastructure. + +The feedback must be requested by you, the contributor, and will always +be shared with you (even if you request for it to be submitted to your +manager). -- 2.37.3