UFS V11 patch-set
Hi!
Could you please check the following patch-set in order to evaluate if it is ready for v4.6?
[PATCH v11 0/6] add support for DWC UFS Controller
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396797?#2396797
[PATCH v11 1/6] fixed typo in ufshcd-pltfrm
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396790?#2396790
[PATCH v11 2/6] added UFS 2.0 capabilities
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396791?#2396791
[PATCH v11 3/6] added support for DesignWare Controller
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396795?#2396795
[PATCH v11 4/6] added support for Synopsys G210 Test Chip
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396792?#2396792
[PATCH v11 5/6] add TC G210 platform driver
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396794?#2396794
[PATCH v11 6/6] add-TC-G210-pci-driver
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396793?#2396793
Thank you very much!
Regards,
Joao
Hi!
Could you please check the following patch-set in order to evaluate if it is ready for v4.6?
[PATCH v11 0/6] add support for DWC UFS Controller
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396797?#2396797
[PATCH v11 1/6] fixed typo in ufshcd-pltfrm
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396790?#2396790
[PATCH v11 2/6] added UFS 2.0 capabilities
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396791?#2396791
[PATCH v11 3/6] added support for DesignWare Controller
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396795?#2396795
[PATCH v11 4/6] added support for Synopsys G210 Test Chip
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396792?#2396792
[PATCH v11 5/6] add TC G210 platform driver
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396794?#2396794
[PATCH v11 6/6] add-TC-G210-pci-driver
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396793?#2396793
Thank you very much!
Regards,
Joao
PS: Changed JBottomley e-mail address.
Quoted 5 lines · On Friday 18 March 2016 12:52:13 Joao Pinto wrote:
Hi!
Could you please check the following patch-set in order to evaluate if it is ready for v4.6?
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.
Arnd
Hi!
Quoted 9 lines · Arnd Bergmann
Quoted 5 lines · On Friday 18 March 2016 12:52:13 Joao Pinto wrote:
Hi!
Could you please check the following patch-set in order to evaluate if it is ready for v4.6?
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.
Isn't it possible to be merged into a ufs-dwc branch in the SCSI Git tree that could be pulled later, like Bjorn did in the PCIe RC?
Quoted 3 lines
Arnd
Joao
Hi Rafael, James, Mark and Christoph,
I check in the scsi git tree that you were the last to merge code to the ufs repository.
Is it possible to merge this code into a ufs-dwc branch in SCSI repository, in order to be merged in v4.6-rc1?
[PATCH v11 0/6] add support for DWC UFS Controller
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396797?#2396797
[PATCH v11 1/6] fixed typo in ufshcd-pltfrm
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396790?#2396790
[PATCH v11 2/6] added UFS 2.0 capabilities
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396791?#2396791
[PATCH v11 3/6] added support for DesignWare Controller
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396795?#2396795
[PATCH v11 4/6] added support for Synopsys G210 Test Chip
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396792?#2396792
[PATCH v11 5/6] add TC G210 platform driver
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396794?#2396794
[PATCH v11 6/6] add-TC-G210-pci-driver
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396793?#2396793
Quoted 16 lines · Joao Pinto
Hi!
Quoted 13 lines · Arnd Bergmann
Quoted 5 lines · On Friday 18 March 2016 12:52:13 Joao Pinto wrote:
Hi!
Could you please check the following patch-set in order to evaluate if it is ready for v4.6?
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.
Arnd
Thanks,
Joao
Hi,
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.
[PATCH v11 0/6] add support for DWC UFS Controller
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396797?#2396797
[PATCH v11 1/6] fixed typo in ufshcd-pltfrm
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396790?#2396790
[PATCH v11 2/6] added UFS 2.0 capabilities
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396791?#2396791
[PATCH v11 3/6] added support for DesignWare Controller
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396795?#2396795
[PATCH v11 4/6] added support for Synopsys G210 Test Chip
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396792?#2396792
[PATCH v11 5/6] add TC G210 platform driver
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396794?#2396794
[PATCH v11 6/6] add-TC-G210-pci-driver
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2396793?#2396793
Quoted 10 lines · Joao Pinto
Quoted 10 lines
Hi!
Quoted 7 lines · Arnd Bergmann
Quoted 5 lines · On Friday 18 March 2016 12:52:13 Joao Pinto wrote:
Hi!
Could you please check the following patch-set in order to evaluate if it is ready for v4.6?
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
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.
Arnd
Thanks,
Joao
Quoted 4 lines · Joao Pinto
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):
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines · Arnd Bergmann
Quoted 3 lines
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.
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
Quoted 29 lines · Mark Brown
Quoted 4 lines · Joao Pinto
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):
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines · Arnd Bergmann
Quoted 3 lines
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.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:04:25AM +0000, Joao Pinto wrote:
Please don't top post, reply in line with needed context. This allows readers to readily follow the flow of conversation and understand what you are talking about and also helps ensure that everything in the discussion is being addressed.
Quoted 4 lines
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.
Like I say the next steps are those Arnd gave you: repost after -rc1. Then give people at least a week or so to respond, people do get busy and other people are also sending patches.
Quoted 7 lines · Mark Brown
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:04:25AM +0000, Joao Pinto wrote:
Please don't top post, reply in line with needed context. This allows readers to readily follow the flow of conversation and understand what you are talking about and also helps ensure that everything in the discussion is being addressed.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 4 lines
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.
Like I say the next steps are those Arnd gave you: repost after -rc1. Then give people at least a week or so to respond, people do get busy and other people are also sending patches.
Understood, I will repost this patch set after -rc1.
I suggest that the UFS maintenance should be revised because the e-mail of ufshcd.c authors are no longer valid and the current maintainer (Vinayak Holikatti) is having a career shift (has you can check in LinkedIn) and probably is not available at the moment to do patch reviews.
Thanks,
Joao
Quoted 10 lines · Mark Brown
Quoted 4 lines · Joao Pinto
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.
Like I say the next steps are those Arnd gave you: repost after -rc1. Then give people at least a week or so to respond, people do get busy and other people are also sending patches.
I'd also suggest checking James Bottomley's e-mail address, the one you're using here bounces and isn't the one advertised in MAINTAINERS (you should check that for other maintainers too).
Quoted 8 lines · Mark Brown
Quoted 6 lines · Mark Brown
Quoted 4 lines · Joao Pinto
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.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Like I say the next steps are those Arnd gave you: repost after -rc1. Then give people at least a week or so to respond, people do get busy and other people are also sending patches.
I'd also suggest checking James Bottomley's e-mail address, the one you're using here bounces and isn't the one advertised in
MAINTAINERS(you should check that for other maintainers too).
I took James's email from commit logs in UFS. Thanks for the info.
Joao
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
"Joao" == Joao Pinto <[email protected]> writes:
Joao,
Joao> Isn't it possible to be merged into a ufs-dwc branch in the SCSI Joao> Git tree that could be pulled later, like Bjorn did in the PCIe Joao> RC?
I just started 4.7/scsi-queue so now is a good time to resubmit.
Thanks!
Signature · 1 line
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
Quoted 4 lines · Martin K. Petersen
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
"Joao" == Joao Pinto <[email protected]> writes:
Joao,
Quoted 8 lines
Joao> Isn't it possible to be merged into a ufs-dwc branch in the SCSI Joao> Git tree that could be pulled later, like Bjorn did in the PCIe Joao> RC?
I just started 4.7/scsi-queue so now is a good time to resubmit.
Thanks!
Hi Martin!
Thanks, I will do that in a minute.
Joao