From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754927AbcBZSfy (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Feb 2016 13:35:54 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f180.google.com ([209.85.192.180]:33307 "EHLO mail-pf0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754514AbcBZSfw (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Feb 2016 13:35:52 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 03/12] net-next: mediatek: add embedded switch driver (ESW) To: John Crispin , Andrew Lunn References: <1456496504-50429-1-git-send-email-blogic@openwrt.org> <1456496504-50429-4-git-send-email-blogic@openwrt.org> <20160226151813.GD12022@lunn.ch> <56D06E3F.1020100@openwrt.org> Cc: "Fred Chang (?????????)" , "Steven Liu (?????????)" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Carlos Huang (?????????)" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Matthias Brugger , "David S. Miller" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org From: Florian Fainelli Message-ID: <56D09AB7.3000203@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 10:34:31 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56D06E3F.1020100@openwrt.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 26/02/16 07:24, John Crispin wrote: > > Hi, > > would the series be ok if we just dropped those parts and then have a > driver in the kernel that wont do much with the out of tree patches ? > > the problem here is that on one side people complain about vendors not > sending code upstream. once they start being a good citizen and provide > funding to send stuff upstream the feedback tends to be very bad as seen > here. I agree with David here, the feedback from Andrew is very constructive, you just don't like the feedback you are being given, which is a different thing. You can't always get a 12 series patches adding a new driver accepted after second try, look at all the recent submissions that occured, it took 5-6-7 maybe more submissions until things were in a shape where they could be merged. If for your next submission you get the feedback that switchdev/DSA is deprecated, and something new needs to be used, then I would agree that feedback is not acceptable, I doubt this will be the case unless we wait another 10 years to get these patches out. > we are planning on doing a DSA driver but one step at a time. this > kind of feedback will inevitably lead to vendors doing second thoughts > of upstream contributions. If you are planning on a DSA driver, which sounds like a good plan, then maybe drop the integrated switch parts for now, keep it as a local set of patches for your testing, and just get the basic CPU Ethernet MAC driver to work for data movement, so that part gets in, and later on, when your DSA driver is ready, that's one less thing to take care of. They ultimately are logically spearated drivers if you use DSA, a little less if you use switchdev. -- Florian