Re: UFS V11 patch-set

[Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com>]

Hi Mark,

I have no intend to break the rules. I am just trying to communicate with UFS
maintainers that so far gave me no response. Merging in v4.7 is fine, but I
would like that UFS maintainers give me some feedback about the next steps, but
so far didn't have luck.

Thanks,
Joao


On 3/22/2016 10:58 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:31:28AM +0000, Joao Pinto wrote:
> 
>> The following patch-set was approved by Arnd Bergmann and Rob Herring and I
>> would appreciate that someone from SCSI / UFS gave a final checkout in order to
>> evaluate the possibility of still merging it to v4.6 or putting it in a branch
>> in SCSI to be merged to v4.7.
> 
> I've no idea why you're sending me this stuff but please stop - you sent
> a similar mail yesterday and I see there were a bunch of similar mails
> before you started CCing me into the thread - but sending daily top
> posted content free pings is just going to annoy people (or at least
> it's annoying me) and sending them to random other maintainers isn't
> likely to improve things.  This is especially the case when we're more
> than half way through the merge window and the code apparently isn't
> even in -next yet.  
> 
> Please stop this and follow Arnd's advice (which you quoted from the
> message you're replying to):
> 
>>>> On 3/18/2016 2:49 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 
>>>>> I think the code is ok now, but the timing apparently didn't work for 4.6.
>>>>> I'd suggest you resend as soon as 4.6-rc1 is out so it can get merged into 4.7.
> 
> If there's some reason to break the process you need to articulate what
> it is and give people a chance to respond but that's *very* rare, unless
> there is an unusually strong reason people are going to use the normal
> development workflow.
>