Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/9] phy: phy-ocelot-serdes: add ability to be used in a non-syscon configuration

[Lee Jones]

On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 02:19:44PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 17-03-23, 11:54, Colin Foster wrote:
> > > The phy-ocelot-serdes module has exclusively been used in a syscon setup,
> > > from an internal CPU. The addition of external control of ocelot switches
> > > via an existing MFD implementation means that syscon is no longer the only
> > > interface that phy-ocelot-serdes will see.
> > >
> > > In the MFD configuration, an IORESOURCE_REG resource will exist for the
> > > device. Utilize this resource to be able to function in both syscon and
> > > non-syscon configurations.
> >
> > Applied to phy/next, thanks
>
> Please read the netdev FAQ. Patches sent to netdev contain the tree that
> the submitter wishes the patches to be applied to.
>
> As a result, I see davem has just picked up the *entire* series which
> means that all patches are in net-next now. net-next is immutable.
>
> In any case, IMHO if this kind of fly-by cherry-picking from patch
> series is intended, it should be mentioned during review to give a
> chance for other maintainers to respond and give feedback. Not all
> submitters will know how individual maintainers work. Not all
> maintainers know how other maintainers work.

Once again netdev seems to have applied patches from other subsystems
without review/ack.  What makes netdev different to any other kernel
subsystem?  What would happen if other random maintainers started
applying netdev patches without appropriate review?  I suspect someone
would become understandably grumpy.

--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]