From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@arm.com>
Cc: "scott.davis@starlab.io" <scott.davis@starlab.io>,
"christopher.clark@starlab.io" <christopher.clark@starlab.io>,
"sstabellini@kernel.org" <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
"Daniel P. Smith" <dpsmith@apertussolutions.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Introducing a common representation of boot info
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2022 11:01:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46944677-13fd-829f-1b73-13720bf2956e@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AS8PR08MB79910EC13ABF2C848AF9850092809@AS8PR08MB7991.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
On 06.07.2022 09:30, Henry Wang wrote:
> It seems that this series has been stale for more than a month, with:
>
> Patch #1 has some discussions in thread.
> Patch #2 #3 #4 need some feedback from maintainers.
>
> So sending this email as a gentle reminder. Thanks!
As a general remark: RFCs, at least in my view, take lower priority than
"ordinary" patch submissions (and other work). I, for example, have this
and other on my "to look at" list, but I can't really predict when all
higher priority items would have been dealt with. It's the sad reality
that in effect this often means RFCs won't be looked at at all. One of
the many unfortunate effects of our limited review bandwidth.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-06 9:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-31 2:41 [RFC PATCH 0/4] Introducing a common representation of boot info Daniel P. Smith
2022-05-31 2:41 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] kconfig: allow configuration of maximum modules Daniel P. Smith
2022-05-31 9:07 ` Bertrand Marquis
2022-05-31 10:45 ` Daniel P. Smith
2022-05-31 10:49 ` Bertrand Marquis
2022-05-31 10:56 ` Daniel P. Smith
2022-05-31 13:52 ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-05-31 13:54 ` Jan Beulich
2022-06-01 7:40 ` George Dunlap
2022-06-01 9:06 ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-06-07 11:34 ` Julien Grall
2022-05-31 9:25 ` Julien Grall
2022-05-31 10:53 ` Daniel P. Smith
2022-06-01 17:35 ` Julien Grall
2022-06-02 8:49 ` Jan Beulich
2022-06-07 11:37 ` Julien Grall
2022-06-03 12:58 ` Jan Beulich
2022-05-31 2:41 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] headers: introduce generalized boot info Daniel P. Smith
2022-05-31 2:41 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] x86: adopt new boot info structures Daniel P. Smith
2022-05-31 2:41 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] x86: refactor entrypoints to new boot info Daniel P. Smith
2022-07-06 7:30 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] Introducing a common representation of " Henry Wang
2022-07-06 9:01 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2022-07-06 9:28 ` Henry Wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46944677-13fd-829f-1b73-13720bf2956e@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=Henry.Wang@arm.com \
--cc=christopher.clark@starlab.io \
--cc=dpsmith@apertussolutions.com \
--cc=scott.davis@starlab.io \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.