Hello, Às 3:51 PM de 4/12/2017, David Miller escreveu: > From: Joao Pinto <joao.pi...@synopsys.com> > Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 14:55:03 +0100 > >> Understand your point, but for now our development and testing setup will be >> based on the IP Prototyping Kit, consisting of a FPGA + PHY. > > That's completely, and utterly, unacceptable. > > I will be quite frank with you, that instances like this are causing > people to contact me privately and telling me that your handling of > becomming the stmmac driver maintainer is causing very real and > serious concerns.
So, adding features to the driver are causing concerns to people? People don't have to worry about maintenance, since goals are not to be a maintainer. My job is just to help improve and add missing features to the driver and that's it. > > You cannot develop performance based features and only test their > impact on FPGA when almost all users are on real silicon. > > And this requirement is absolutely non-negotiable. > > You must test the impact on real silicon otherwise your performance > numbers, which are required to be provided in the commit message > for any "performance" feature or change, are completely useless. Next time I won't mention anything about performance, honestly. "Drop TX Status" is just an IP Core feature that can or not be used, it is up to the driver user. > > I want your attitude on these matters to change quickly, as myself > and many other interested parties are becomming extremely frustrated > with how you are handling things. Attitude? Are there complaints with my attitude? I try to help in everything I can, I listen to feedback, I did the rework on the Multiple Buffers patch to try to solve the negative impact in sunxi board. Sincerely I don't see a bad attitude. Are you mentioning the e-mail about sxgbe? > > Thank you. > Thank you.
