lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Dec]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v19 02/13] x86/setup: Use parse_crashkernel_high_low() to simplify code
    From
    Date


    On 2021/12/29 18:38, Dave Young wrote:
    > On 12/29/21 at 11:11am, Borislav Petkov wrote:
    >> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 03:45:12PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
    >>> BTW, I would suggest to wait for reviewers to response (eg. one week at
    >>> least, or more due to the holidays) before updating another version
    >>>
    >>> Do not worry to miss the 5.17. I would say take it easy if it will
    >>> miss then let's just leave with it and continue to work on the future
    >>> improvements. I think one reason this issue takes too long time is that it was
    >>> discussed some time but no followup and later people need to warm up
    >>> again. Just keep it warm and continue to engage in the improvements, do
    >>> not hurry for the specific mainline release.
    >>
    >> Can you tell this to *all* patch submitters please?
    >
    > I appreciate you further explanation below to describe the situation. I do not
    > see how can I tell this to *all* submitters, but I am and I will try to do this
    > as far as I can. Maintainers and patch submitters, it would help for both
    > parties show sympathy with each other, some soft reminders will help
    > people to understand each other, especially for new comers.
    >
    >>
    >> I can't count the times where people simply hurry to send the new
    >> revision just to get it in the next kernel, and make silly mistakes
    >> while doing so. Or not think things straight and misdesign it all.
    >>
    >> And what this causes is the opposite of what they wanna achieve - pissed
    >> maintainers and ignored threads.

    I just hope the first 4 patches can be merged into v5.17. It seems to me
    that it is quite clear. Although the goal of the final stage is to modify
    function parse_crashkernel() according to the current opinion. But that's not a
    lightweight change after all. The final parse_crashkernel() change may take
    one version or two. In this process, it maybe OK to do a part of cleanup first.

    It's like someone who wants to buy a luxury car to commute to work six months
    later. He buys a cheap used car and sells it six months later. It sounds right
    to me, don't you think?

    >>
    >> And they all *know* that the next kernel is around the corner. So why
    >> the hell does it even matter when?

    Because all programmers should have confidence in the code they write. I have
    a new idea, and I'm free these days, so I updated v19. I can't rely on people
    telling me to take a step forward, then take a step forward. Otherwise, stand
    still.

    >>
    >> What most submitters fail to realize is, the moment your code hits
    >> upstream, it becomes the maintainers' problem and submitters can relax.

    Sorry, I'll make sure all the comments are collected and then send the next
    edition.

    >>
    >> But maintainers get to deal with this code forever. So after a while
    >> maintainers learn that they either accept ready code and it all just
    >> works or they make the mistake to take half-baked crap in and then they
    >> themselves get to clean it up and fix it.
    >>
    >> So maintainers learn quickly to push back.
    >>
    >> But it is annoying and it would help immensely if submitters would
    >> consider this and stop hurrying the code in but try to do a *good* job
    >> first, design-wise and code-wise by thinking hard about what they're
    >> trying to do.
    >>
    >> Yeah, things could be a lot simpler and easier - it only takes a little
    >> bit of effort...
    >>
    >> --
    >> Regards/Gruss,
    >> Boris.
    >>
    >> https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
    >>
    >
    > Thanks
    > Dave
    >
    > .
    >

    --
    Regards,
    Zhen Lei

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2021-12-29 15:14    [W:3.033 / U:0.208 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site