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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 CCD8DC433E0 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:15:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F73E20748 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:15:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="IfqgHBk8" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728277AbgEUHPK (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2020 03:15:10 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43796 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727003AbgEUHPK (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2020 03:15:10 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x441.google.com (mail-wr1-x441.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::441]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9AAAC061A0F for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 00:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x441.google.com with SMTP id l17so5621025wrr.4 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 00:15:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=p77jW0bTzDyLRaf317y5GD/ZKjkvxPMT932RAeaMAb4=; b=IfqgHBk8TUbVPf7O7vGbwylQQEkCh/0J1YVBnRPyZD1tREJ0pl89rrI1qu0U/2jA5t PQmPQDRhvT/+G/ztmJrpqcwtVq7paSbLKHk5hy3uM68F7yjgxuLYAYjLchbGeU4wfE5h yjwfz/RgjCAgSOGtLQxLcO7zV7huxv0whreIEV3eWz+UdShtJtfEwadiKUbTXWLg0VNq G09IRB4lZyG/oIeG6eELBr8P/l3uFM46MraO+UK9/nEDE36+c5w/r+bFjczh2/bMEqeY KzkAx75+/reOYhHfKVCuszmOE9YSI00Y31fIB4OLlrV0CCGr+5xEe15iRKhMWw02GIt0 95yg== 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:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=p77jW0bTzDyLRaf317y5GD/ZKjkvxPMT932RAeaMAb4=; b=TA/1NHdbFB3X0Qae2Sex4hQtVkR7Zwa8PjDN8hwzd+n1tNMR2LzyEVC97DVJQIPwVo bpVO4wC//KuJD0ElbrAtUc15IQpc3PNYwGzE5Gbygql8RPhATb18yGydd1ojT46JFGJT nWlSdqLu0ZxdIqOE6HMPVaMKL7D+cGpBlAF8g6Q1FTkekpUa9WwmpoBo14SMM46+4Dyg xlhzMz5rxNd2oBudTVmzBLa1NagDS/9Ir9OtmNMMs0DlGsADEfTUcvbyMaDRRWemsnUk 4/5pmI9u0wWdfESEE9ZJll72P5t9pj4GUKanm+DeVaqmWiGRsyhn1r+Fgb9jTlNUpjI3 4Hnw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5326DuuAcFQ06OCV1q812CuxwA/KwcMminl9wpEgEWL+qweNybKo cVhSd0SDEtlNYs3LD8l/LiH5Hg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw75EkeQPC0RMpgE1lAuQ0zdCw15S/xf4hV+CXMc9qNSnh5vVlU00bc6Oaho791ZHu99726gA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:56c6:: with SMTP id m6mr7162745wrw.78.1590045308398; Thu, 21 May 2020 00:15:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dell ([95.149.164.102]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 1sm5720506wmz.13.2020.05.21.00.15.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 May 2020 00:15:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 08:15:05 +0100 From: Lee Jones To: Thierry Reding , Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, Subbaraman Narayanamurthy , David Collins , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Dan Carpenter , Daniel Thompson , Daniel Vetter , David Airlie , Guenter Roeck , Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 00/11] Convert PWM period and duty cycle to u64 Message-ID: <20200521071505.GL271301@dell> References: <20200423114857.GG3612@dell> <20200423215306.GA8670@codeaurora.org> <20200424064303.GJ3612@dell> <20200424221422.GA31118@codeaurora.org> <20200427064434.GA3559@dell> <20200520231508.GA29437@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20200520231508.GA29437@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 20 May 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 07:44:34AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Apr 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 07:43:03AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > A great deal of mailing lists contain numerous protections against > > > > things like flooding and spamming. One of those protections is a > > > > check for "Too many recipients to the message". Most of the time this > > > > simply requires moderator intervention by way of review and approval, > > > > but this ultimately depends on the ML's configuration. > > > > > > > > The first thing to ascertain is why your recipients list is so large. > > > > Have you added every reviewer, subsystem-maintainer, maintainer and > > > > contributor suggested by get-maintainer.pl? If so, consider pruning > > > > that a little. Contributors do not tend to care about subsequent > > > > changes to a file. As someone who receives a lot of patches, I tend > > > > to get fed-up when receiving patches simply because I made a change X > > > > years ago. Stick to listed maintainers/reviewers in the first > > > > instance and see how far that takes you. > > > > > > Thank you for the detailed reply. I did this in the first few patchsets > > > and then when a few patches didn't get any attention, expanded the > > > audience thus. Still, around 50% of the patches in this series remain > > > unreviewed by anyone. > > > > This isn't a reason to add more recipients (who are likely to care > > even less than your original group). However it *is* a good argument > > for including all of the specified maintainers/reviewers in on all of > > the patches. > > > > > > If your recipients list is as succinct as reasonably possible, maybe > > > > just accept that every version isn't going to be archived by every > > > > ML. It's still much more useful for the correct people to have > > > > visibility into the set than for it to be archived multiple times. > > > > > > Thank you, will prune the list and remove past contributors from the > > > Cc-list and add all parties to all patches. > > > > Great. Once you've done that, we can start to help you acquire the > > Acks you need on your remaining patches. > > Hi Lee, Thierry, Uwe, > > In v14 of this patchset I've pruned the list of contributors, removed > past contributors from the cc-list, and added all parties to all patches > (except for the patches that are yet to reviewed, for which I've added > what get_maintainer.pl showed me). I've also resent v14 a couple of > times already, with around a week's time interval between resends, and > somehow it seems like this set has lost traction. > > Could you please indicate what next steps I should take to have more > eyes on the unreviewed patches? Only 4 out of 11 patches remain > unreviewed. Looks like we're waiting on Thierry (again). This has been a common theme over the past few months. Perhaps he has changed employer/project? -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog