On 09.01.24 07:31, D, Lakshmi Sowjanya wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> >> Sent: Saturday, January 6, 2024 8:50 PM >> To: D, Lakshmi Sowjanya <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; intel-wired- >> [email protected]; Dong, Eddie <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher >> S >> <[email protected]>; Brandeburg, Jesse >> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; >> Nguyen, Anthony L <[email protected]>; N, Pandith >> <[email protected]>; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa >> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/11] Add support for Intel PPS Generator >> [...] >> At some point you should announce v1 of the series. RFC is usually being >> neglected by many (busy) maintainers. > > This patch series is dependent on > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/[email protected]/T/ > which is RFC.
So I understand my dependency series being RFC prevents the PPS series from dropping the RFC tag (correct me if I am wrong). I plan to send out a non-RFC version of the dependency series next. So far I think there will only be polishing changes. Due to testing being some effort, I wanted to test and send it together with some other series. But if this is blocking the PPS series, I think I could send out a non-RFC version of the dependency series earlier (by the end of January?). Please let me know what would align with the PPS series timeline. Regards, Peter > > Regards, > Sowjanya >> >> -- >> With Best Regards, >> Andy Shevchenko >> >
