On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 5:13 PM Thorsten Leemhuis <fed...@leemhuis.info> wrote: > > Hi Don! > > Am 05.06.20 um 17:01 schrieb Don Zickus: > > Thanks for the feedback! > > Thx for saying that, I already feared I sooner or later might come > across as the crazy guy that complains about everything and therefor not > really taken seriously… ;-) > > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 02:24:13PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> Lo! I'm slightly puzzled. These messages are now sent to > >> fedora-kernel-list, which kinda sounds like input from the fedora > >> community is wanted. But all this discussions look RHEL-specific to me. > > Yes. > > > >> Or am I missing something? Fedora at least seems to enable > >> CONFIG_SENSORS_AMD_ENERGY if I read > >> https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/blob/os-build/redhat/configs/fedora/generic/x86/CONFIG_SENSORS_AMD_ENERGY > >> > >> right. And that file is not touched by the patch. So from a perspective > >> of someone Fedora developer that subscribes to fedora-kernel-list this > >> and similar messages look like useless noise – and at the same time they > >> are hard to read, as it's not easy to see if a patch is relevant for > >> Fedora or not. > > It is easy to see this as useless noise. > > […] > > I am open to suggestions to help create a better experience here. Would > > adding a keyword in the subject line help filter this? Something else? > > Maybe another mailing list for configs is something to bring back up? > > Well, I don't mind a few more mails, I already get a lot and they make > not much of a difference, *if* they are useful somehow. But to be useful > they are currently to hard to parse/understand: you have to scroll down > quite far and at the same time look closely to not miss the interesting > part, as that is only three lines long per symbol: > ``` > +++ b/redhat/configs/common/generic/CONFIG_SENSORS_AMD_ENERGY > > @@ -0,0 +1 @@ > > +# CONFIG_SENSORS_AMD_ENERGY is not set > ``` > > At the same time one IMHO relevant context information is missing > afaics: how did the Fedora kernel maintainers set this option? > > IOW: I'd even like the mails if they would look more like this, where > the interesting part is at the top: > > ``` > Subject: New configs in drivers/hwmon > > Set newly introduced config symbols like this in kernel-ark: > > * set CONFIG_SENSORS_AMD_ENERGY to 'not set' for RHEL ('m' in Fedora) > * set CONFIG_SENSORS_MAX16601 to 'not set' for RHEL ('not set' in Fedora) > > <Symbol description/> > <all the other stuff needed, including the the slightly annoying > standard header that starts with 'As a reminder, the ARK configuration > flow involves', and obviously the diff itself/> > ``` > > > Maybe even add the config symbol to the subject if it doesn't get to > long that way. > > That would makes these mails a lot more useful and easier to review for > me. And I guess it's the same for RH partners and customers as well.
Yes, I agree with that summary, it would make it more useful for me too. > > Please keep the feedback > > Be careful what you wish for ;-) > > > coming, we will slowly work through this! > > Thx for working on this, much appreciated! > > CU, knurd > _______________________________________________ > kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
