[GIT PULL] Multi Cluster Power Management infrastructure

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 10:33:25PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 05 April 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > 
> > Now, I'm currently on holiday.  I'm going to be on holday until after
> > mid-April.  I'm not pulling anything until then.  I'm not applying anything
> > until then.  I'm not even reading this mailbox - and given current mail
> > rates at 300-400 messages per day, I will *not* be reading back over a
> > fortnights worth of email.
> 
> I haven't reviewed the patches before, and only heard of the controversy
> from Nico's email yesterday. Independent of your personal situation and
> who implemented the code, I think it's clear that a lot of people (not
> just Linaro) want to see it get merged and not having it upstream is
> blocking platform specific code from getting put into arm-soc.

Nicolas is doing what he always does when he doesn't get his own way - he
tries to force his way.  This is exactly what's going on here...

> Since you are currently on holiday, I think it's best if we at least put
> it into asm-soc as a for-rmk/mcpm branch in order to give it coverage
> in linux-next and let us merge the dependent platform code into "late"
> branches for 3.10. I still hope the nontechnical issues can be resolved
> in time to let you pull it into your tree before the merge window.

I doubt it will.  The way I now feel, I feel betrayed by Linaro, and
I feel that they have done me a great disservice.  I don't see that
there's anything Linaro has to offer me in way of work (if they could,
then they would be able to tell me what areas they have available -
but they can't even do that.)

How can this be resolved?  I've no idea, that's entirely up to Linaro
and its management to work out whether they actually have any work
available.  My conclusion, given the sparseness of any kind of idea of
work is that they do not have much idea about any kind of work, and
I suspect that they have no knowledge themselves as to what work
really needs to be done.

If there was one, then it would be nice and simple to include in an
email a list of work items that were available - but that's not what
has been done ove rthe last 4 months.

So no, _I_ can't resolve it until Linaro gets a handle on what the hell
that organization wants to do.

But the whole message here is: if you fuck me around commercially, you
can't *not* expect it to have an impact on what I volunteer to do, and
you'd better *not* put work-items on the table and then take them away
again, and then end up demanding that they be done for gratis just
because of my position.  *That* is grossly unfair.