From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from gloria.sntech.de (gloria.sntech.de [185.11.138.130]) (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 2C75722F16D; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:04:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.11.138.130 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739196270; cv=none; b=hL/qxPSHYABvIJ8mn1JonerOMbMrg2NOnOxWUs6ovwKJJAKZDaJGC7rUGpwjoqSNXQy0QSax8rE5C3hG9NJGQogTttPXeujphE/pK+DRXktqB7k9ELFNfGul61lTqUpp56Tr9iZP/G0EhKfn0SD6ORCs2mAnMrKH7T6+5FYmsz4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739196270; c=relaxed/simple; bh=530cEWB/iUyOXf2BuCAkA6Zdb/i/eyD6p5TbApfPjtE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HC1gL958yeNwHdidSjgEo1/WpyukEZPTd66gnHeOfayhkTXgPbZyrWPOxwHHaT/HbF7bFRAvMViCpAbw0O5YB4sLZFx52hPF4UbyfNDGAaaufLkActx1Y925UhpozygjNlKayukI7CZn0ohJCX/bLK5LNkdIgIhsFY6AQ0ZhCos= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sntech.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sntech.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sntech.de header.i=@sntech.de header.b=2y259NvN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.11.138.130 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sntech.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sntech.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sntech.de header.i=@sntech.de header.b="2y259NvN" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sntech.de; s=gloria202408; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version: References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=UfuBIcq6o6pd5Lky7KHDHxvpQdqj4uIwbsrsWkRv4y8=; b=2y259NvN7jKxSqKZofA185dq2o enK8KcFyHAimIMTX0cygzP3gW5BXHU98khsVCAAw3cZXywfXhHFuWS+YT+2SNZkIzZqjD1NDdnjxD XC5fezOqRRhoBDtwcb0zf1mYK2yET2BrphLt10XNzKUTtBYqI6PvzSLJr0kUHwACeXPPESMAlqHbx wdX6eR7HNTChazp8xGXMXgXK4Cdfb5wIKTe8dU1DeHp8DUhFyWcFKh5QCVpvjvY1KxH6GXhJ7Y9Uj 5Vs0G2alSTwv+Hlg17R1mh1SgdKIrd9D8HLgETiH6QQBnQ4AbNQaV2mkJbLnU1zMcYMhwZRiNcnWY OPNU8jHQ==; Received: from i53875bc0.versanet.de ([83.135.91.192] helo=diego.localnet) by gloria.sntech.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1thUOc-0003Qo-V6; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 15:04:22 +0100 From: Heiko =?UTF-8?B?U3TDvGJuZXI=?= To: Mark Brown Cc: Liam Girdwood , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Alexey Charkov , linux-sound@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: ASoC: rockchip: Add compatible for RK3588 SPDIF Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 15:04:22 +0100 Message-ID: <870305083.0ifERbkFSE@diego> In-Reply-To: <56d128d7-c4bd-48de-b823-0b88147220e1@sirena.org.uk> References: <20250120-rk3588-spdif-v1-0-1415f5871dc7@gmail.com> <4315116.iIbC2pHGDl@diego> <56d128d7-c4bd-48de-b823-0b88147220e1@sirena.org.uk> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Mark, Am Montag, 10. Februar 2025, 14:20:58 MEZ schrieb Mark Brown: > On Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 10:10:47PM +0100, Heiko St=C3=BCbner wrote: > > Am Montag, 20. Januar 2025, 10:01:27 MEZ schrieb Alexey Charkov: > > > Add a compatible string for SPDIF on RK3588, which is similar to the > > > one on RK3568. >=20 > > as the binding is more in the driver-realm, is this patch still > > somewhere on your radar? >=20 > Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time > for review. People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so=20 > on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes) > please allow at least a couple of weeks for review. If there have been > review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed. > > Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at > all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed > directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches > anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are > some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches > for the subsystem are normally handled. With it being 3 weeks since the patch was originally posted, I thought it might be the time to ask if the binding-patch was still around. I vaguely do remember you saying in the past that if a patch hasn't been applied/handled after X time-units, it wouldn't be in your inbox anymore, but am not sure anymore ;-) .