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

From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"Andrew Lunn" <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	"Heiner Kallweit" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
	"Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	"Alvin Šipraga" <alsi@bang-olufsen.dk>,
	"Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	"Claudiu Manoil" <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
	"Daniel Scally" <djrscally@gmail.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"DENG Qingfang" <dqfext@gmail.com>,
	"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"Florian Fainelli" <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	"George McCollister" <george.mccollister@gmail.com>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Hauke Mehrtens" <hauke@hauke-m.de>,
	"Heikki Krogerus" <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
	"Kurt Kanzenbach" <kurt@linutronix.de>,
	"Landen Chao" <Landen.Chao@mediatek.com>,
	"Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	"Marek Behún" <kabel@kernel.org>,
	"Matthias Brugger" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	"Sakari Ailus" <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
	"Sean Wang" <sean.wang@mediatek.com>,
	UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com,
	"Vivien Didelot" <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
	"Woojung Huh" <woojung.huh@microchip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/6] net: dsa: always use phylink
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 17:25:05 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220718142505.3shv2rwe4fakgsp2@skbuf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YtVZ6VI1yvbgSYDg@shell.armlinux.org.uk>

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 02:02:33PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> In the second RFC, I stated:
> 
> "Some of the questions from the original RFC remain though, so I've
> included that text below. I'm guessing as they remain unanswered that
> no one has any opinions on them?"
> 
> Clearly, I was soliciting answers from _everyone_ who received this,
> not just the two people in the To: header.
(...)
> This is _not_ the issue I'm raising. I am complaining about the
> "default_interface" issue that you've only piped up about, despite
> (a) an explicit question having been asked about that approach, (b) it
> appearing in not just one, not two, not three but four RFC series sent,
> and only finally being raised when a non-RFC series was sent.
> 
> This whole debarcle could have been avoided with providing feedback at
> an earlier stage, when I explicitly requested it _several_ times.

Please stop shoving quotes of your questions in my face, I'm still glad
I deleted my draft responses to them when they were originally asked,
because *when* (not *if*) things will have went sideways, I would have
blamed myself for people wanting to test/respond but not having whom to
talk to, because you rage quit.

You need to understand that a voluntary reviewer doesn't have a duty to
respond to you on any certain date, and that I'm not obliged to shut up
about where to place "default_interface" because I haven't said anything
about it in the first N series. I was on the fence whether it was even
worth saying anything about it at all, and the only reason I decided to
do it was because the patch to change every DSA driver's phylink_get_caps()
prototype now conflicts with concurrent changes done to drivers, and
doesn't apply to net-next anyway:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/E1oCNl3-006e3n-PT@rmk-PC.armlinux.org.uk/
So I really can't be reasonably accused of wanting to stall this series.

You have no reason whatsoever to pick a fight with me, so please stop it.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel