Re: [PATCH 3/5] dt-bindings: arm: Document Socionext MB86S71 and Fujitsu F-Cue

[Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>]

On 6 November 2017 at 06:58, Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 05.11.2017 um 04:39 schrieb Ard Biesheuvel:
[...]
>>
>> Again, I am not the one who is ranting here. You hit a nerve by
>> accusing me of 'rebelling against linux.git' while this is quite the
>> opposite of what I am doing.
>
> Actually you did confirm that point by starting an argument about not
> needing a central repository and you not liking Linux as the location.
> That was exactly what I meant with my original comment.
>
> Adding Actions Semi was somewhat easy as a new vendor and now - roughly
> a year after the board went to market - there's Linaro contributions
> from Mani that I'm thankful for.
>
> Whereas patches keep falling into a dark hole when there's already other
> work for a certain vendor, such as Marvell and now Socionext, with no
> one feeling responsible for either taking them or saying, "hey, we're
> not going to submit any conflicting DT bindings for SynQuacer because we
> use ACPI, so please go ahead with proposal X, thanks for your efforts".
>
> Don't complain about me ranting if you belittle my volunteer work that I
> believe Linaro and its partners should've done in the first place: If I
> can get an initial mainline PoC done as an individual on a few
> evenings/weekends, then the same should be super-easy for an
> organization with lots of engineers and paying member companies.

The only person doing the ranting, rebelling and belittling in this
thread is you. I have never commented on the nature of your work, let
alone belittle it.

I understand you are frustrated with how some of the upstreaming of
96boards is handled. I don't have anything to do with that. The only
96boards i have in my drawer (and never use) is an original HiKey.

I work for the enterprise group, not the 96boards team, and I make a
point of not working with vendor trees at all. The only reason I
submitted some patches to the upcoming release of the ERP is so that
we have an installer that works out of the box, but all the patches I
did contribute were already queued for v4.15 at that point.

> As I've pointed out, an ever-increasing frustration builds over Linaro
> continuing to announce new boards (such as SynQuacer) that will be the
> best since sliced bread, while neglecting the 96boards that are already
> on the market and equally are promoted under the "96Boards" brand.
> The Linaro CEO has been promoting the Orange Pi i96 in keynotes, so
> management is aware of that hardware, and yet not a single patch came
> from Xunlong, RDA Micro or Linaro. No patch review from RDA either. And
> my patches got stuck on the bindings not including interrupts property
> for the UART yet, since I still do not have their custom interrupt
> controller working... So the context here is that not just my 4.14+
> pulls got stuck but three other 96Boards patch series, too.
>
> Regards,
> Andreas
>
> --
> SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
> GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
> HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)