13 Jun
2016
13 Jun
'16
12:17 p.m.
Hi Waldemar,
Just saw that new change for ARC ("arc: use generic lowlevellock",
http://cgit.uclibc-ng.org/cgi/cgit/uclibc-ng.git/commit/?id=1b49dc96d103e01…).
Even though this is very nice to see fixes and improvements done by people
outside Synopsys IMHO it still makes sense to add SNPS people in the loop so
we may review submitted patches.
So could you please first get an Ack from either Vineet (in Cc) or me before
committing stuff for ARC? Alternatively just Cc linux-snps-arc(a)lists.infradead.org.
Again I'm very happy with uClibc-ng and appreciate a lot all your efforts
and to make uClibc-ng more robust let's review stuff together.
Also it was hard for me to find a relevant patch on the mailing list
because I was expecting patch to be sent via git "send-email" (which I think
should be a standard way for patch submissions in uClibc). Only going through a relevant
thread for ARM I found a message with attached files.
-Alexey
13 Jun
13 Jun
8:38 p.m.
Hi Alexey,
Alexey Brodkin wrote,
Hi Waldemar,
Just saw that new change for ARC ("arc: use generic lowlevellock",
http://cgit.uclibc-ng.org/cgi/cgit/uclibc-ng.git/commit/?id=1b49dc96d103e01…).
Even though this is very nice to see fixes and improvements done by people
outside Synopsys IMHO it still makes sense to add SNPS people in the loop so
we may review submitted patches.
You are right, I first thought I need to add you, then I thought you
are reading the low traffic list anyway.
Sorry for the trouble.
So could you please first get an Ack from either
Vineet (in Cc) or me before
committing stuff for ARC? Alternatively just Cc linux-snps-arc(a)lists.infradead.org.
I will do in the future. Do you thing following patch would be okay
to commit to make changes to architecture specific parts
more formal?
Again I'm very happy with uClibc-ng and appreciate
a lot all your efforts
and to make uClibc-ng more robust let's review stuff together.
Also it was hard for me to find a relevant patch on the mailing list
because I was expecting patch to be sent via git "send-email" (which I think
should be a standard way for patch submissions in uClibc). Only going through a relevant
thread for ARM I found a message with attached files.
Is the commit okay or do I need to revert it?
@Max: Okay to add you as Xtensa maintainer?
best regards
Waldemar
27 Jun
27 Jun
9:27 a.m.
Hi Waldemar,
On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 22:38 +0200, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
Hi Alexey,
Alexey Brodkin wrote,
Sorry for late reply.
Yep this commit is fine so no need to do anything here.
-Alexey
Hi Waldemar,
Just saw that new change for ARC ("arc: use generic lowlevellock",
http://cgit.uclibc-ng.org/cgi/cgit/uclibc-ng.git/commit/?id=1b49dc96d103e01…).
Even though this is very nice to see fixes and improvements done by people
outside Synopsys IMHO it still makes sense to add SNPS people in the loop so
we may review submitted patches.
You are right, I first thought I need to add you,
then I thought you
are reading the low traffic list anyway.
Sorry for the trouble.
So could you please first get an Ack from either Vineet (in Cc) or me before
committing stuff for ARC? Alternatively just Cc linux-snps-arc(a)lists.infradead.org.
I will do in the future. Do you thing following patch would be okay
to commit to make changes to architecture specific parts
more formal?
Again I'm very happy with uClibc-ng and appreciate a lot all your efforts
and to make uClibc-ng more robust let's review stuff together.
Also it was hard for me to find a relevant patch on the mailing list
because I was expecting patch to be sent via git "send-email" (which I think
should be a standard way for patch submissions in uClibc). Only going through a relevant
thread for ARM I found a message with attached files.
Is the commit okay or do I
need to revert it?
2858
days inactive
2872
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Alexey Brodkin -
Max Filippov -
Waldemar Brodkorb