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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC18C433E6 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 20:29:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CE5222CE3 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 20:29:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731948AbhAKU3Z (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:29:25 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46]:37355 "EHLO mail-pj1-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730029AbhAKU3Y (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:29:24 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-f46.google.com with SMTP id b5so248360pjk.2; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 12:29:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=bs5hIiTdtArUwZXVNhTrx+cKzcudFaDql1aXMWa105w=; b=OjVhuO0DNwFguyoS/oxCHqSinv+bNI72Axq94w0aMt3aiAegtb/HZTQYNKqqbvFl4E kSUb9RFY8TrmvthCFMOldtI5zIHi/vx8sfIFfvap7Nu/WoENtdEZFscnpiEKpHLGlyG0 kV2ubmAmi6DMqggs0Fn9j7zLWJySCelZeTo2r0aekL8LTUpkglm3rAAdIOrK0qpx8bmq FBhgm+I4OzCZlw+HyTwLQVj1zXj6JlxKNMq02qYdcmfhJwgqlpv9TVwcvC/OtSFhiNDt 7w1qOhzp4kWS+tbq02VimhrxisxKtrGrxedxp7+neGMBSNO1esjVPCr9Q2AKQQMZrjZm bX3A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531R6JlT0wRk4ldFj2eNLJRaxznICagqHFjezY8NNStB19WlHt3L VzL7gqrM0N8Ek8kmWC3CSlg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz8Gygell2OGxA9tak/DOtNQ8K+ZDbfPgkSyJjxKxsTs8Pk33MM+LjV/R3qj5esOjH4Z48v5Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:a501:b029:dc:3e1d:4ddb with SMTP id s1-20020a170902a501b02900dc3e1d4ddbmr1073418plq.60.1610396923727; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 12:28:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2601:647:5b00:1162:1ac0:17a6:4cc6:d1ef]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b5sm626768pga.54.2021.01.11.12.28.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 12:28:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 12:28:41 -0800 From: Moritz Fischer To: Tom Rix Cc: Greg KH , Moritz Fischer , "linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, moritzf@google.com, Rikard Falkeborn , Zheng Yongjun , Russ Weight , "Gerlach, Matthew" , Sonal Santan , Xu Yilun , Richard Gong Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] FPGA DFL Changes for 5.12 Message-ID: References: <95af46d6-d123-f610-2f21-6d6de6f248e9@redhat.com> <9bc01a73-726f-a979-1246-6ea048961670@redhat.com> <7923d9dc-c503-5318-6e4f-931f8c13c1be@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org Tom, On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 11:46:03AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote: [..] > I have been doing the first review in a couple of days after every patch landing. I appreciate your help with doing reviews. > I see some pretty good response from the developers to fix the issues raised.  ... yet patches have been rejected. So it doesn't seem purely a matter of throughput? > But I do not see Moritz picking up the review until weeks later. I'll admit there are delays that happen, I have a dayjob as I pointed out in earlier conversations. Furthermore, just because I do not immediately send out an email does not mean I don't look at stuff. If people show up with 100kLOC patchsets that don't pass checkpatch, it'll take a while for me to even read up and understand what they're doing / trying to do. > This consistent delay in timely reviews is a bottleneck. As Greg pointed out even ones that were reviewed got rejected, so clearly the issue is with the quality and not the speed at which we send them on. > It would be good if the big first reviews could be done in parallel. Again depending how the patchsets are structured it will take me a while to process. Having them re-use existing infrastructure, following coding and submission guidelines will speed up the process. On a personal level, being told I'm too slow and not doing my job as maintainer doesn't exactly increase my motivation to get to it ... - Moritz