Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: audio-graph-card2: use correct endpoint when getting link parameters

[Ivaylo Dimitrov]

On 13.01.25 г. 19:01 ч., Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 06:24:18PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
>
> > I understand people are busy, but I also see community sent patches being
> > treated with low priority, or being silently ignored too often lately, but
> > lets not go into that.
>
> > I sent that RFC patch on 20.12.2024, today is 13.10.2025 - if this is not a
> > reasonable time, well, what is? By the same time I sent 2 other patches and
> > they are already in -next. In the meanwhile I see patches sent in the
> > morning to be reviewed till the end of the day - not critical bugfixes
> > patches but new functionality.
>
> Well, you've used a subject line for a different subsystem so there's a
> good chance that I simply didn't look at the mail beyond that (many of
> us get a lot of random CCs).  You also don't seem to have CCed the ALSA
> list, nor for that matter Morimoto-san who maintains the generic card so
> perhaps I was just waiting for his review.  I honestly can't remember.
> I'll also note that there's only been a week of work time for me so far
> this year, and you sent this on the last day I worked last year.

Honestly, I was surprised Morimoto-san was missing, but see:

ivo@ivo-H81M-S2PV:/mnt/VM/home/user/linux/droid4-linux$ 
./scripts/get_maintainer.pl 
0001-soc-audio-graph-card2-use-correct-endpoint-when-gett.patch
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@xxxxxxxxx> (supporter:SOUND - SOC LAYER / 
DYNAMIC AUDIO POWER MANAGEM...)
Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> (supporter:SOUND - SOC LAYER / DYNAMIC 
AUDIO POWER MANAGEM...)
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@xxxxxxxx> (maintainer:SOUND)
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxxx> (maintainer:SOUND)
Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@xxxxxxxxx> 
(commit_signer:1/1=100%,authored:1/1=100%,added_lines:28/28=100%,removed_lines:31/31=100%)
alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated list:SOUND - SOC LAYER / DYNAMIC 
AUDIO POWER MANAGEM...)
linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list)

this is on 6.6.y, against which the RFC patch is. Perhaps I should have 
called get_maintainer.pl in -next tree, my bad, will note for the future.

> > Also, I don't understand how the ping was content free, given that it was on
> > top of the original patch, unless I don't get what "content free" is
> > supposed to mean, possible, I am not native English speaker.
>
> Your mail added the single word "ping".  That is not saying anything
> meaningful so adds nothing, and as the form letter I sent indicated
> results in a mail that's not directly actionable.  As it says:
>
> | all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed
> | directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches
> | anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are
> | some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches
> | for the subsystem are normally handled.
>
> Blub for the subject letter thing:
>
> Please submit patches using subject lines reflecting the style for the
> subsystem, this makes it easier for people to identify relevant patches.
> Look at what existing commits in the area you're changing are doing and
> make sure your subject lines visually resemble what they're doing.
> There's no need to resubmit to fix this alone.

oh, yeah, sorry, that should have been ASoC:, not soc:

Ok, I think both of us wasted lots of cycles in vain, please, just 
confirm if I shall do anything else but wait.

Thanks and regards,
Ivo