From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D4E63858439 for ; Tue, 16 May 2023 07:29:41 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 6D4E63858439 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDB952F4; Tue, 16 May 2023 00:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (e121540-lin.manchester.arm.com [10.32.110.72]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2683C3F7BD; Tue, 16 May 2023 00:29:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Richard Sandiford To: "Li\, Pan2" Mail-Followup-To: "Li\, Pan2" ,"gcc-patches\@gcc.gnu.org" , "juzhe.zhong\@rivai.ai" , "kito.cheng\@sifive.com" , "Wang\, Yanzhang" , "jeffreyalaw\@gmail.com" , "rguenther\@suse.de" , richard.sandiford@arm.com Cc: "gcc-patches\@gcc.gnu.org" , "juzhe.zhong\@rivai.ai" , "kito.cheng\@sifive.com" , "Wang\, Yanzhang" , "jeffreyalaw\@gmail.com" , "rguenther\@suse.de" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Machine_Mode: Extend machine_mode from 8 to 16 bits References: <20230512050016.476110-1-pan2.li@intel.com> <20230513131325.1667305-1-pan2.li@intel.com> Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 08:29:38 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Pan2 Li's message of "Tue, 16 May 2023 01:12:09 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-23.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_NONE,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: "Li, Pan2" writes: > Kindly ping for this PATCH v3. The patch was sent on Saturday, so this is effectively pinging after one working day in most of Europe and America. That's too soon and comes across as aggressive. I realise you and others are working intensively on this. But in a sense that's part of the reason why reviews might seem slow. The volume of RVV patches recently has been pretty high, so it's been difficult to keep up. There are have also been many other non-RVV patches that have been "unlocked" by stage 1 opening, so there's a high volume from that as well. Also, please bear in mind that most people active in the GCC community have their own work to do and can only a dedicate a certain amount of the day to reviews. And reviewing patches can be time-consuming in itsself. So sometimes a patch will get a review within the day. Sometimes it will take a bit longer. The fact that a patch doesn't get a response within one working day doesn't mean that it's been forgotten. Thanks, Richard