From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07C6413AF3 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 15:26:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4650E173D; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 08:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE28B1FB; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 08:16:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bogus (e103737-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.49]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6E163F67D; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 08:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 16:15:52 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Nikunj Kela Cc: cristian.marussi@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, Sudeep Holla , krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, andersson@kernel.org, konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] Add qcom hvc/shmem transport support Message-ID: <20230918151552.n3jvw2qqi5tmyfbb@bogus> References: <20230718160833.36397-1-quic_nkela@quicinc.com> <20230911194359.27547-1-quic_nkela@quicinc.com> <0efe305e-031b-bdf5-0268-ca1c6d562653@quicinc.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0efe305e-031b-bdf5-0268-ca1c6d562653@quicinc.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:01:26AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote: > Gentle Ping! > I will take a look at this later this week. That said, I am unable be gauge the urgency based on you ping here. You have shown the same urgency last time for a feature that I queued promptly just to know that it was abandon within couple of days. So I don't want to rush here simply based on the number of pings here. I need to understand that it is really that important. For now, I am thinking of skipping even v6.7 just to allow some time for Qcom to make up its mind and be absolutely sure this is what they *really* want this time. -- Regards, Sudeep