From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 23:10:14 +0100 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [driver-core PATCH v6 2/9] async: Add support for queueing on specific NUMA node Message-ID: <20181113221014.GB2235@amd> References: <154170028986.12967.2108024712555179678.stgit@ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com> <154170041079.12967.13132220574997822111.stgit@ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com> <20181111193208.GB8332@kroah.com> <20181111195903.GA9726@amd> <20181111203304.GA16871@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="aVD9QWMuhilNxW9f" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181111203304.GA16871@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Greg KH Cc: Alexander Duyck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, tj@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, rafael@kernel.org, len.brown@intel.com, zwisler@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, dave.jiang@intel.com, bvanassche@acm.org List-ID: --aVD9QWMuhilNxW9f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi! > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck > > > > --- > > >=20 > > > No one else from Intel has reviewed/verified this code at all? > > >=20 > > > Please take advantages of the resources you have that most people do > > > not, get reviewes from your coworkers please before you send this out > > > again, as they can give you valuable help before the community has to > > > review the code... > >=20 > > We always said to companies we want to see code as soon as > > possible. You don't have to review their code, but discouraging the > > posting seems wrong. >=20 > I have a long history of Intel using me for their basic "find the > obvious bugs" review process for new driver subsystems and core changes. > When I see new major patches show up from an Intel developer without > _any_ other review from anyone else, directed at me, I get suspicious it > is happening again. >=20 > If you note, Intel is the _only_ company I say this to their developers > because of this problem combined with the fact that they have a whole > load of developers that they should be running things by first. >=20 > And yes, to answer Dan's point, we do want to do review in public. But > this is v6 of a core patchset and there has been NO review from anyone > else at Intel on this. So if that review was going to happen, one would > have thought it would have by now, instead of relying on me to do it. >=20 > And yes, I am grumpy, but I am grumpy because of the history here. I am > not trying to discourage anything, only to take ADVANTAGE of resources > that almost no other company provides. >=20 > Hope this helps explain my statement here. Thanks for explanation. I did not have same bad experience with Intel, so I did not understand what was going on. Best regards, Pavel --=20 (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo= g.html --aVD9QWMuhilNxW9f Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlvrS8YACgkQMOfwapXb+vKXDACfRF940tdVtPFWr2eNlsV9g5xo fPQAnAiV3u4EVf2YtSl7wU1bP7fIeP/X =PK1K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --aVD9QWMuhilNxW9f--