Re: [PULL] Add variants of devm_clk_get for prepared and enabled clocks enabled clocks - Uwe Kleine-König

From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>,
	Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
	linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>,
	Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>,
	Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@microchip.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	Alexandru Ardelean <aardelean@deviqon.com>,
	kernel@pengutronix.de,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PULL] Add variants of devm_clk_get for prepared and enabled clocks enabled clocks
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 08:06:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210722060654.nudpdtemosi64nlb@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210705080144.zfbzkm7l3gmnh6st@pengutronix.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1548 bytes --]

Hello Stephen,

On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 10:01:44AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 07:14:34PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 10:21:23PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > given that I don't succeed in getting any feedback for my patch set, I'm
> > > trying with a pull request today. It would be really great if this pull
> > > request made it finally in for the next merge window.
> > 
> > It seems sending a pull request didn't help either :-\
> > 
> > I'm waiting since October for feedback, several people expressed to like
> > this series and I want to make use of it to simplify a few drivers. I'm
> > quite annoyed that your missing feedback blocks me from further
> > improving stuff.
> 
> There is still no feedback, not even something like: "I saw your
> nagging, sorry. I'm drown in other missions, please have some more
> patience."
> 
> I assume it's not to much to expect at least such a reply after more
> than 8 months?

The next merge window is over now. The pull request still merges fine
into v5.14-rc2. I'm still convinced it adds some benefit and I want to
use it to simplify a bunch of drivers. But I cannot without this being
merged.

Do I have to consider creating these functions in the pwm namespace to
continue here? This cannot be the right thing to do?!

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]