[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 0/8] sf: improve support of (Q)SPI flash memories

[Tom Rini]

On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 10:36:57AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 08/26/2017 08:14 AM, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de> wrote:
> >>> On 08/25/2017 06:28 PM, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de> wrote:
> >>>>> On 08/25/2017 06:07 PM, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Yang, Wenyou <Wenyou.Yang at microchip.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This patch set has been here for a long time, could you have a look and take
> >>>>>>> it?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Yeah, I'm holding this because of my current spi-nor work. But anyway
> >>>>>> I will try to merge on coming MW If all OK.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is your work posted somewhere or available in some git repository ?
> >>>
> >>> You did not answer this question.
> >>>
> >>>>> I don't see any reason why you should not perform your maintainer duties
> >>>>> by reviewing/replying to an incoming patch, no matter what work you do
> >>>>> to the subsystem though ...
> >>>>
> >>>> I didn't write "this series holding spi-nor work" since it has some
> >>>> new features I'm taking time to review.
> >>>
> >>> I never implied this. Rather the opposite, you claim you do some work on
> >>> the SPI NOR core, yet you let this patchset rot in the list for over a
> >>> month now and gave the author zero feedback.
> >>>
> >>> Notifying the author about the core changes early could've prevented a
> >>> lot of wasted effort on his side. Reviewing early could've prevented a
> >>> lot of frustration from patches being ignored.
> >>>
> >>>> There is nothing wrong with
> >>>> maintainer duties here, you must need to understand.
> >>>
> >>> I disagree.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I agree with Marek here. I found it's really hard to get feedback for
> >> SF patches in time and what I have to do is to ping again and again.
> > 
> > I agree that the SF side patches have got some delay recently, but ie
> > something not intentional. SF stack is not stable as of now, so I'm
> > working on SPI-NOR (v10)[1] the new patches for SF need to wait -
> > please be patient.
> 
> What are the problems with the stack causing this instability ?
> 
> How do you plan to stabilize the stack for the current release ?
> 
> Given how complex and incomplete this patch(set) [1] is and that it's
> already in v10, it seems it will take a while to get it into shape in
> which it can be included in mainline. Blocking all other contributions
> because of this patchset seems wrong and hurtful to the contributors to me.

Yes.  We cannot let a new framework block progress enabling things on
our current framework.  We are not at the point with spi-nor that we can
say nothing else is allowed to move forward.  Thanks!

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20170826/172c6bee/attachment.sig>