Re: [PATCH net-next 0/6] net: dsa: always use phylink

Vladimir Oltean
2022-07-16T11:16:00Z

On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 04:03:59PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 21:59:24 +0100 Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > The only thing that delayed them was your eventual comments about
> > re-working how it was being done. Yet again, posting the RFC series
> > created very little in the way of feedback. I'm getting to the point
> > of thinking its a waste of time posting RFC patches - it's counter
> > productive. RFC means "request for comments" but it seems that many
> > interpret it as "I can ignore it".
>
> I'm afraid you are correct. Dave used to occasionally apply RFC patches
> which kept reviewers on their toes a little bit (it kept me for sure).
> These days patchwork automatically marks patches as RFC based on
> the subject, tossing them out of "Action required" queue. So they are
> extremely easy to ignore.
>
> Perhaps an alternative way of posting would be to write "RFC only,
> please don't apply" at the end of the cover letter. Maybe folks will
> at least get thru reading the cover letter then :S

Again, expressing complaints to me for responding late is misdirected
frustration. The fact that I chose to leave my comments only when
Russell gave up on waiting for feedback from Andrew doesn't mean I
ignored his RFC patches, it just means I didn't want to add noise and
ask for minor changes when it wasn't clear that this is the overall
final direction that the series would follow. I still have preferences
about the way in which this patch set gets accepted, and now seems like
the proper moment to express them.