From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpout-03.galae.net (smtpout-03.galae.net [185.246.85.4]) (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 7F0973CCFA6; Wed, 27 May 2026 07:51:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.246.85.4 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779868284; cv=none; b=ZKq5usUwyChzUrgWWIYkyiwkJTb9uGAtrYhc4l5o/vMZDkFuSyvTBUIGLvDs1yYKNxvPQOMlKZ3XEmBf0L2ywL/ERkiaDG0e4sH1gzECagI4Ay/YnT6f6Q1HAlQrIQOQkkrT5Qq94iGsG86rojp3J1oh/s5NJE/SHTrL4IZ3czA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779868284; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1hAPk0fCzqKDEWyYlZld8zHu9LYU5ItX3xTPPOXG93w=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=nvx/bsILjdpoQbAyjzjQgCnJgZbWeqnjZ8m9o60LQ7OFLhpu43VQ/gyLur2UMSmOZAekTQQ4YJKrgSwNx1GrrZ6TU6rYpekpympHYwSf9HMLKgxHvVIx7RQ2gHWjZXISTiQJgFEEXZ3lcJ6eUodCR6xZdOC/g6aQwTN/3XYyMsg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=C/ux/zih; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.246.85.4 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="C/ux/zih" Received: from smtpout-01.galae.net (smtpout-01.galae.net [212.83.139.233]) by smtpout-03.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E68E04E42D64; Wed, 27 May 2026 07:51:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.galae.net (mail.galae.net [212.83.136.155]) by smtpout-01.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9003601A1; Wed, 27 May 2026 07:51:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id CB1AF1088805F; Wed, 27 May 2026 09:51:14 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=dkim; t=1779868277; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=1hAPk0fCzqKDEWyYlZld8zHu9LYU5ItX3xTPPOXG93w=; b=C/ux/zihO8IHOB1g5WttQW5EU71hCn3ZPiATSjNDLmaPPcZruY/j64VUAG7U54lppvi6sK H3ObYWKG32jW8pp6pDLaR4DADasGoDpLg/8l+OsXAMWQ1Sn5UieTyjd8PR0dsK9kDRg5LT KzI7ISjePwtE2EZnbMP3ZXXhGlLXQLpInhNz7TddzyjsdDRvSVlxesVIkj3gdh0AfpBPPp j/xTkCzud86K/rENIJinYtHem/MX0IqljP/+2CisHdn2r1wsTiim7BcODKrNhf02xjLW/t c5H72244z7BXYuBkXS7Neow+vKpGI/Vkw96+FeNiQX5yzLToplg9OCb1Vjrbxg== From: Miquel Raynal To: Pratyush Yadav Cc: Tudor Ambarus , Michael Walle , Takahiro Kuwano , Richard Weinberger , Vignesh Raghavendra , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Sean Anderson , Thomas Petazzoni , Steam Lin , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/28] mtd: spi-nor: swp: Improve locking user experience In-Reply-To: <2vxzcxyi42qh.fsf@kernel.org> (Pratyush Yadav's message of "Tue, 26 May 2026 17:20:06 +0200") References: <20260507-winbond-v6-18-rc1-spi-nor-swp-v5-0-93453e1a9597@bootlin.com> <20260507-winbond-v6-18-rc1-spi-nor-swp-v5-4-93453e1a9597@bootlin.com> <9432f07f-3724-4257-b6ab-84721e619f78@linaro.org> <875x4fphgr.fsf@bootlin.com> <779f2680-2c67-4bbd-9576-bde8e83d111d@linaro.org> <87o6i7o0tj.fsf@bootlin.com> <2vxz8q965ub7.fsf@kernel.org> <87v7cakz7u.fsf@bootlin.com> <2vxzcxyi42qh.fsf@kernel.org> User-Agent: mu4e 1.12.7; emacs 30.2 Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 09:51:14 +0200 Message-ID: <87mrxll28d.fsf@bootlin.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 Hi Pratyush, >> I know what the maintainer load can be, sometimes it does not play well >> with the rest of the your personal and professional duties. But the >> series has already been on the list for about 8 months, it's been looked >> at by other people, the ones who had enough time to dedicate to it. From >> my perspective, asking such contributions to wait indefinitely and then >> suggesting partial application without a technical reason is not a >> sustainable way to handle contributions. This series has not moved much, >> it could have been applied *much* earlier. I've now addressed most of >> the comments from Sashiko, v6 is coming, further improving the quality >> for sure, as there were bugs - there are always. I am of course happy to >> address further technical concerns, if there are any, but I would >> strongly prefer merging the series as the coherent set it was intended >> to be, rather than only taking the preparatory parts. > > Unfortunately I am only a patch monkey for SPI NOR these days and do not > have any time to do reviews, especially for big series. I mainly check > for reviewed patches and try to apply them. Even that is becoming harder > these days since I am more busy at new $DAYJOB. I fully understand that. > I understand your frustration, and do take the blame for this, but > unfortunately can't promise anything better in the future. We pretty > much don't have any active reviewers in SPI NOR. Michael and Tudor are > also short on time these days. If your employer cares about SPI NOR, > perhaps you can encourage them to support developers in helping out with > reviews and maintenance. Well, I believe I already take a faire share in reviewing and maintaining the subsystem :-) I even started getting a look into spi-nor patches recently since I ramped up on the subsystem. Michel and Tudor regularly make useful feedback, Takahiro is ramping up, I try to keep enough availability for maintaining NAND, SPI NAND and anything that is MTD but not in one of the three main subsystems. I don't think we are in a bad maintainership situation. > Applying the reviewed patches reduces the total patchset size and does > make things easier to review and land. So I don't get why you are so > opposed to the idea. Applying series partially is okay; specifically for this series, patches 1-8 could have been taken alone, but a bit earlier IMHO. > But anyway, I'll bite the bullet here and apply the series. You > generally have high quality patches so I am not super worried about this > to begin with. We can deal with the bugs or shortcomings later I > suppose... Just to be clear, I am not asking for a fast path here. We need to follow the contribution and review model, because that is the saniest model that worked well for us until now. I am however opposed to the statut quo situation that was progressively settling because of the lack of availability. Also, I am always following closely when patches get applied, so I can respond quickly in case of breakage. Thanks for your work Pratyush, don't get me wrong, your work is highly appreciated, and your availability is a parameter we will comply with. Cheers ;-) Miqu=C3=A8l