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 bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D75FAC79F82 for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2026 00:47:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From :Subject:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=SwCh9Ld1JOdq2P1NYMKZndipV6XqTb9tvIWRkfYlK6g=; b=qeOYr+bx607M7f5o7KBZOqqwJm bFNB4IGeYgy6VIaM8N+2RiBp6nELNRfgJiW5Olg20YfR2AyoljSWs8nL40pJRGs5GzlHCGt8KybQe Hcde35VWLU0upc2ZjVkeDb54tu4Wdp05jEzn1xxsT1m4z7Kxk/bCxaluY/5qQX5bXEvNw7UIlspUd L6Jr/U3XMVM+3a3vO2QSH46cXOuDQxl7Nm5pSAHR4A2w1ijB+7vC8jrOG7sfezdAcp7VZMm5nrT2F Ri0ODtGY0d++lcDcIe0YwKDXKbw3U1pSKfNLb7e+LK5ZORYsLCygfRfWOUtiGwoRsLGxiSPpbOVA9 OS+nTOTQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x2eYX-00000003Wph-3XFs; Sat, 05 Sep 2026 00:46:53 +0000 Received: from xs1.mindbit.ro ([80.86.107.70] helo=mail.mindbit.ro) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x2eYV-00000003Woq-0VVb; Sat, 05 Sep 2026 00:46:52 +0000 Received: from dog.kanata.rendec.net (pool-174-112-193-187.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [174.112.193.187]) by mail.mindbit.ro (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46CE9C2AEE; Sat, 5 Sep 2026 03:46:41 +0300 (EEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail.mindbit.ro 46CE9C2AEE DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rendec.net; s=default; t=1788569202; bh=SwCh9Ld1JOdq2P1NYMKZndipV6XqTb9tvIWRkfYlK6g=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=J96grHf2SOphrttK7FzcYLqiA882B2VNzMTii/hBrr345ASQqtHBDMTUkvNbT0aUA 4yDthPWWcLTeGrku7JDU0pwaDBud41inkc+RmsRtNv1pRD15x0h+q6Gdf53gTzFp65 9UCizr98DRVRJO9s6gaxjpiCKTvTiQLk4L2MCqOYHIyT7B7cCxhsRtQ3RknxubG2j8 BcEUtlmnCW9aS0py3srFk6Jyy2V4/3PhaOGzuhpE0vS+vo58SweQpT7lgP7ttuJeLU wCqFvdPNK8iQepfVzwjkdmFv9MV9X4V1clIWRO1fugv6NfcpsjocyLDsKrHC5fUTsK lWwk0eHh3uHDQ== Message-ID: Subject: Re: Interrupt chip driver maintainence From: Radu Rendec To: Thomas Gleixner , LKML Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Marc Zyngier , Anup Patel , Paul Walmsley Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2026 20:46:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <871pb9841j.ffs@fw13> References: <871pb9841j.ffs@fw13> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.58.3 (3.58.3-1.fc43) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.9.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260904_174651_504435_3B771DBB X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 14.94 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, 2026-09-04 at 16:49 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > I'm wading through my inbox full of patches for interrupt chip drivers > and I'm thoroughly annoyed. The way how this works today is not > sustainable. >=20 > Patches end up in my and Radu's inbox and all we can do is go through > them mostly on a formal basis, but it's out of our scope to look at the > correctness vs. a particular hardware. In the past I just picked up > patches when I had the gut feeling they are remotely correct, but I'm > tired of this. >=20 > I've just marked about 20 patches and patch series obsolete due to zero > feedback from the relevant architecture/SoC people who were on Cc. >=20 > And I'm going to do that from now on very consequently. If the > architecture, SoC experts can't be bothered to look after their stuff, > then don't expect me to suck all of this crap up and then deal with the > complaints when it breaks. >=20 > I'm still going to pick up obvious and simple bug fixes, but for > anything which requires deep knowledge on the underlying hardware, I'm > going to just mark them obsolete when they molded in my inbox unreviewed > by the people who understand it for six weeks. I think that's fair! For what it's worth, as a simple reviewer, I also consciously ignored multiple patches that required knowledge of the hardware, simply because I didn't have that knowledge. --=20 Best regards, Radu