From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com (Alexandre Belloni) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 19:44:11 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] rtc: Allow rtc drivers to specify the tv_nsec value for ntp In-Reply-To: <20171127175254.GL31757@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> References: <20171013175433.GA22062@obsidianresearch.com> <20171123095456.lkc4nkuzsd2q26mm@piout.net> <20171127175254.GL31757@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20171127184411.GA19577@piout.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 27/11/2017 at 17:52:54 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > I'm actually rather disappointed that Alexandre Belloni has only now > brought up his dis-satisfaction with the approach after all the effort > that Jason and myself have put in to it. It's not like Alexandre was > not copied on the patches and discussion. > > If Alexandre could not be bothered to bring up his concerns while the > discussion was on-going in September, and didn't bother raising them > in October, I'd say that Alexandre's opinion at this point doesn't > count for much - if it wasn't important to state at the time or for > a couple of months after, why does it become important to state after > the thing has been merged. > > Maybe the idea here is basically to waste people's time letting them > develop a patch for an approach, and then object at the last minute > to that approach. Hardly seems fair or even reasonable. > How unfair that is! Really, you are not in a position to make that kind of comment because you are not even replying to patches in your own subsystem. But maybe my time doesn't count as much as yours. I was going to go for a middle ground but now, I'm really more inclined to just revert the whole stuff. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com