From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:05:10 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 16/20] Roll crc32 into hash infrastructure In-Reply-To: References: <1356548233-5570-1-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> <1356548233-5570-17-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> <20130217205321.B0E612005E0@gemini.denx.de> <51216721.1010603@ti.com> <20130218113558.843A1200531@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <51225F46.5050200@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/18/2013 11:36 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Wolfgang, > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> Dear Tom, >> >> In message <51216721.1010603@ti.com> you wrote: >>> >>> There's another thread I don't have yet (and I don't have this >>> one in gmail yet even). But, I am OK with custodians using >>> their repos, but not the master branch, for unrelated but >>> otherwise good patches. I'm also fine with patchwork bundles. I >>> suppose we could use the staging repository for these changes >>> instead. >> >> What I mostly object about there is that these patches would go >> into mainline basicly unreviewed, as patch submission and pull >> request is all done from a single person, with no other feedback >> on the patches at all. And this affects a lot of common code... > > Fair enough. I suspect a number of people scan the code, but few > feel invested enough to formally Ack it. Also, providing a full > review of such a series can take quite a bit of time. Against > that, I think it is better to get code in and tested than have it > sit around until just before the next release. [snip] >> So there are changes all over the place, including a growth of >> the memory footprint. I think this needs at least minimal >> review. > > We need more reviewers I think. This is where I'm trying to find a good balance right now. If we just wait for reviewed-by lines to fly by, things will sit forever. Partly because enough folks don't feel like they "own" things enough to risk saying they reviewed something that turns out later to have a bug. And partly there's just not enough folks reading patches. I do try and give things some sort of read-over when it's the person posting who is doing the merging, especially for common rather than "their area" code. - -- Tom -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRIl9FAAoJENk4IS6UOR1WJqMP/ie04KKI6NpMPDei9QSJ9+qg peFMXyVXoNWVZ0OuVSgVYOyBNtTmZeUmNsyamtE/1QifAWX6F2lwXHl2teYcebMk 7Fn/N3uzoVisfcFhY3Ec0dgBigYbRm5hiSHF7qzBkS78FfI5XSFaR/XjkshCgLlC i5Vf8Gh6ilb67fLumzxnXU2LLpbfcoOoT7iMLX0C5SFkx9sjo4k/5/WC64jsx8IS NQiaoFX3Ow7uU63G7jEJ4hiqXsp2ulWZTBA4ynN7ydGYiPo+sRXoLRaBYB9yAkRQ 3Uj1a101VX+9LWdNoMRpqv6W3gq75+8nSggovK0DmxtF4X5PaF17Xmpc8dBTT9rE cCIkePKDNgg6QjTAtCxk7+nw997JSjrj1nV0R2+Jm225tby4hIjmnIfnCNgeYbbI II7+ecaUl4w+GxB1SgjFLmEyW0unDsYZauT4sXxSdBp/UOrs4I3XYW4gFofifMcB peJELQYVUHnXblZ+xR+8zY3URsn2vNRxNq5fUDWMUADgvwecfvWFeKaVGDA+aWHs vNFKWayZbt5MpqG4aQJ4mzIhf9avNytf8BSSQ+LFp53xOl5f08OsioN9+4H3rOND LRuiMZ5wtrlJea3Eoi3PFXeO/l4N4eKvDNbwNSwDbS4EZj+4mZbGrNxGglcQK3C+ 1EM1fpRioWEXpGaMpmKV =W6Pn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----