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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 D65BFC4338F for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:17:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB64860FC2 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:17:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232111AbhG1LRF (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 07:17:05 -0400 Received: from jabberwock.ucw.cz ([46.255.230.98]:33656 "EHLO jabberwock.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231631AbhG1LRF (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 07:17:05 -0400 Received: by jabberwock.ucw.cz (Postfix, from userid 1017) id A8DE91C0B7C; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 13:17:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 13:17:02 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Linux LED Subsystem , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linus Walleij , Geert Uytterhoeven , Hans de Goede , Pavel Machek , Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: LED subsystem lagging maintenance Message-ID: <20210728111701.GA894@amd> References: <20210728103551.GA31304@amd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="CE+1k2dSO48ffgeK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-leds@vger.kernel.org --CE+1k2dSO48ffgeK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi! > Thanks for your _prompt_ response! >=20 > > > I have noticed that in the last couple of cycles the LED subsystem is > > > a bit laggish in terms of maintenance (*). I think it's time that > > > someone can help Pavel to sort things out. > > > > > > In any case, I wonder if we have any kind of procedure for what to do > > > in such cases. Do we need to assume that the subsystem is in a > > > (pre-)orphaned state? If so, who is the best to take care of patch > > > flow? >=20 > > To be honest, patches were not applied because they were not that > > important to begin with, >=20 > Reference counting disbalance is not critical, but what is then? Things with end-user impact. What is end-user impact here? How much memory is leaked in usual config? Pavel --=20 http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek --CE+1k2dSO48ffgeK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAmEBPK0ACgkQMOfwapXb+vISRwCgm3B7k0uw3dg7Phcg20qqjuvT N5MAn0YZDFv5/PAha2lLj1lozaPTne/7 =1zQ7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --CE+1k2dSO48ffgeK--