From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fllvem-ot03.ext.ti.com (fllvem-ot03.ext.ti.com [198.47.19.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48EBE31C570; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 11:34:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.19.245 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757590455; cv=none; b=tSRmGFVvNEN7Tk38JCX7xVd9KUBVeIMHPua6IypaPlPrlKdkGnO4+7tNLJurOq6Zc0B8FoW/QshK6/RIndIQ/4k/scxRWJEryON9JqzsMSWbEOpQDU1M/OLrwzI5x0WOLRMNW7+mG0jbcf2TlVHzt2cLo9an7rCDJdaEPV5kZ7o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757590455; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MHJLPizJj9PwysVjP4VNkA1jy0qZ/m9eDWZZUdLDbsc=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=sig8yhCmvfWorPAA7SkMVY4nG3ArYnyVcex9redgOpTK+XwQDh7cWGZrPMIvulO/BLWMt67hCfggQXHPjMirwKI3MIzed6NjNjJBayerkcNGY37hmy4DaK7PZv01dBTzFNFRjysEVTnbvSBJPhKzyju7cRygzoL1UGzib7WZGnA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b=uomWh5Ea; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.19.245 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="uomWh5Ea" Received: from fllvem-sh04.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.54]) by fllvem-ot03.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 58BBY1U0282125; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 06:34:01 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1757590441; bh=EQRCmjrn5BEyVgJX+y9agEEtvuWsRKQbKKezx698Zxc=; h=Date:Subject:To:CC:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=uomWh5EaNA5DtRZkGL6eyKX9UW8m5bwaTflYTsw4b8pp2lQzlN1sMRuZ8qpJFhbFH zQk1HGT22/m8PsAScbMgywnxNCqQd9vILYdFsZfICQ65K8vocNAmt4ynwP/T0SP3R4 XCWLATg7f7uFu1RcWdoBESsddaGIpcz1mTX/u25o= Received: from DFLE113.ent.ti.com (dfle113.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.34]) by fllvem-sh04.itg.ti.com (8.18.1/8.18.1) with ESMTPS id 58BBY1Ck1907627 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 11 Sep 2025 06:34:01 -0500 Received: from DFLE214.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.72) by DFLE113.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.55; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 06:34:00 -0500 Received: from lelvem-mr06.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.8) by DFLE214.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.72) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.2562.20 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 06:34:00 -0500 Received: from [172.24.233.254] (santhoshkumark.dhcp.ti.com [172.24.233.254]) by lelvem-mr06.itg.ti.com (8.18.1/8.18.1) with ESMTP id 58BBXu8B1763650; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 06:33:57 -0500 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 17:03:55 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Miscellaneous fixes and clean-ups To: Mark Brown CC: , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20250905185958.3575037-1-s-k6@ti.com> <96bc8718-8902-4f2e-be96-1cd5e19a6355@ti.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Santhosh Kumar K In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-C2ProcessedOrg: 333ef613-75bf-4e12-a4b1-8e3623f5dcea Hello Mark, On 11/09/25 16:46, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:57:05AM +0530, Santhosh Kumar K wrote: > >> Gentle ping on this! > > Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time > for review. People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so > on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes) > please allow at least a couple of weeks for review. If there have been > review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed. > > Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at > all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed > directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches > anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are > some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches > for the subsystem are normally handled. I understand the concern, and apologies for the follow-up. The first three patches already carry reviewed-by, and the fourth is only a macro changes with no functional impact. Given that the merge window is approaching, I thought it would be reasonable to send a gentle reminder. Regards, Santhosh.