From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751742AbdJYHSX (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Oct 2017 03:18:23 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:54583 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751536AbdJYHSW (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Oct 2017 03:18:22 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+RA1ZOUwlyVFylAxYbWSv2QF0NN2ebvvh21jeVTusL7VvwNp2fNHeIwf0ncyLhOE53w3hfBZQ== X-Google-Original-Sender: Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 09:17:46 +0200 From: Johan Hovold To: Andrey Smirnov Cc: Johan Hovold , Pavel Machek , linux-kernel , Chris Healy , Lucas Stach , Nikita Yushchenko , Lee Jones , Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v7 1/1] platform: Add driver for RAVE Supervisory Processor Message-ID: <20171025071746.GB13452@localhost> References: <20171013061321.31252-1-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> <20171013061321.31252-2-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> <20171013072731.GC29243@localhost> <20171023093054.GG32228@amd> <20171024151325.GA13452@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:40:38AM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:30:54AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >> > > drivers/platform/Kconfig | 2 + > >> > > drivers/platform/Makefile | 1 + > >> > > drivers/platform/rave/Kconfig | 26 ++ > >> > > drivers/platform/rave/Makefile | 1 + > >> > > drivers/platform/rave/rave-sp.c | 677 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> > > >> > First of all, why do these live in drivers/platform and why don't use > >> > the mfd subsystem to implement this driver (instead of rolling your own > >> > mfd-implementation)? > >> > >> Sending contributors around like this is quite uncool. > > > > Asking questions when things are done in unexpected ways is part of the > > review process, and the backstory here wasn't documented in the patch or > > cover letter. > > Cover letter for this submission contains the link to v1 of the > patchset (marked as "[v1]"): > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=149970632624803&w=2 > > whose cover letter captures why the driver was added to > "drivers/platform" to a degree and contains a link to original > submission: You cannot expect a reviewer to go through seven revisions of a patch series to find this information. > Granted it is not completely effortless to get to all of that, but I > don't think it is fair to say that all of that was not documented. I said it "wasn't documented in the patch or cover letter", which I still claim to be an accurate description. You did something odd, I called it out, and now the issue is resolved. Let's move on. Johan