RE: [RFC PATCH v12 01/17] dlb: add skeleton for DLB driver

Chen, Mike Ximing
2021-12-21T14:42:23Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chen, Mike Ximing <mike.ximing.chen@intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2021 9:26 AM
> To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; arnd@arndb.de; Williams, Dan J <dan.j.williams@intel.com>; pierre-
> louis.bossart@linux.intel.com; netdev@vger.kernel.org; davem@davemloft.net; kuba@kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v12 01/17] dlb: add skeleton for DLB driver
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2021 3:57 AM
> > To: Chen, Mike Ximing <mike.ximing.chen@intel.com>
> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; arnd@arndb.de; Williams, Dan J
> > <dan.j.williams@intel.com>; pierre- louis.bossart@linux.intel.com;
> > netdev@vger.kernel.org; davem@davemloft.net; kuba@kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v12 01/17] dlb: add skeleton for DLB driver
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 08:12:00AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 12:50:31AM -0600, Mike Ximing Chen wrote:
> > > > +/* Copyright(C) 2016-2020 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> > > > +*/
> > >
> > > So you did not touch this at all in 2021? And it had a
> > > copyrightable changed added to it for every year, inclusive, from 2016-2020?
> > >
> > > Please run this past your lawyers on how to do this properly.
> >
> > Ah, this was a "throw it over the fence at the community to handle for
> > me before I go on vacation" type of posting, based on your autoresponse email that happened when I
> sent this.
> >
> > That too isn't the most kind thing, would you want to be the reviewer
> > of this if it were sent to you? Please take some time and start doing
> > patch reviews for the char/misc drivers on the mailing list before submitting any more new code.
> >
> > Also, this patch series goes agains the internal rules that I know
> > your company has, why is that? Those rules are there for a good
> > reason, and by ignoring them, it's going to make it much harder to get patches to be reviewed.
> >
>
> I assume that you referred to the "Reviewed-by" rule from Intel. Since this is a RFC and we are seeking for
> comments and guidance on our code structure, we thought it was appropriate to send out patch set out
> with a full endorsement from our internal reviewers. The questions I posted in the cover letter (patch
> 00/17) are from the discussions with our internal reviewers.
.
"we thought it was appropriate to send out the patch set out without* a full endorsement from our
Internal reviewers" --- sorry for misspelling.
>
> I will take some days off as many people would do during this time of the year 😊, but will check mails
> daily and response to questions/comments on the submission.
>
> Thanks for your help.
> Mike