> You did not object to last discussion about this (a month ago) - neither > to my comments nor to resolution - so this patchset repeating the same Because I cannot follow every Renesas patch series there is. You are long enough around to know that large companies have different entities, groups whatsoever. It is quite a challenge to streamline this via one group, we need to share work. We do try hard, though, and have a ARM/RISC-V/RENESAS ARCHITECTURE maintainer. Geert does a *hell of a job* getting all these submission into shape, and he surely does not accept code thrown over the wall. And geez, the patch series was just sent yesterday, you didn't give us even time to raise the issue internally. > pattern from the same folks while ignoring previous talk is > contradicting "not too bad at fixing stuff". First, being a maintainer myself, I do understand the frustration of patch review not being honored. I can also agree that this series did not work out perfectly. But that does not mean that we don't care, in general. Despite all imperfection and possibly different opinions, we try hard to be a good citizen and spend considerable time on doing things right. Accusing us of throwing just "code over the wall" because there is an issue somewhere which hasn't been worked on in one month is plain unfair. That all being said, we will fix it eventually.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
