Re: [PATCH net-next 0/6] net: dsa: always use phylink

Vladimir Oltean
2022-07-16T13:13:54Z

On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 12:43:00PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> In the first RFC series I sent on the 24 June, I explicitly asked the
> following questions:
(...)
> I even stated: "Please look at the patches and make suggestions on how
> we can proceed to clean up this quirk of DSA." and made no mention of
> wanting something explicitly from Andrew.
>
> Yet, none of those questions were answered.
>
> So no, Jakub's comments are *not* misdirected at all. Go back and read
> my June 24th RFC series yourself:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/YrWi5oBFn7vR15BH@shell.armlinux.org.uk/

I don't believe I need to justify myself any further for why I didn't
leave a comment on any certain day. I left my comments when I believed
it was most appropriate for me to intervene (as someone who isn't really
affected in any way by the changes, except for generally maintaining
what's in net/dsa/, and wanting to keep a clean framework structure).
Also, to repeat myself, blaming me for leaving comments, but doing so
late, is not really fair. I could have not responded at all, and I
wouldn't be having this unpleasant discussion. It begs the question
whether you're willing to be held accountable in the same way for the
dates on which you respond on RFC patches.

> I've *tried* my best to be kind and collaborative, but I've been
> ignored. Now I'm hacked off. This could have been avoided by responding
> to my explicit questions sooner, rather than at the -rc6/-rc7 stage of
> the show.

I think you should continue to try your best to be kind and collaborative,
you weren't provoked or intentionally ignored in any way, and it isn't
doing these patches any good.