| Message ID | 20221031173933.936147-2-luca@z3ntu.xyz (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,1/3] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: support more types | expand |
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 06:39:32PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote: > usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the > example to match. You've not copied me on the rest of the series so I've no idea what's going on with dependencies. When sending a patch series it is important to ensure that all the various maintainers understand what the relationship between the patches as the expecation is that there will be interdependencies. Either copy everyone on the whole series or at least copy them on the cover letter and explain what's going on. If there are no strong interdependencies then it's generally simplest to just send the patches separately to avoid any possible confusion.
Hi, On 31/10/2022 18:39, Luca Weiss wrote: > usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the > example to match. Subject is wrong, should be something like: dt-bindings: regulator: qcom,usb-vbus-regulator: update example node name > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz> > --- > Changes in v2: > * New patch > > .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml > index dbe78cd4adba..b1cff3adb21b 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ examples: > pm8150b { > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <0>; > - pm8150b_vbus: dcdc@1100 { > + pm8150b_vbus: usb-vbus-regulator@1100 { > compatible = "qcom,pm8150b-vbus-reg"; > reg = <0x1100>; > }; Thanks, Neil
Hi Neil, On Mittwoch, 2. November 2022 11:38:29 CET Neil Armstrong wrote: > Hi, > > On 31/10/2022 18:39, Luca Weiss wrote: > > usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the > > example to match. > > Subject is wrong, should be something like: > dt-bindings: regulator: qcom,usb-vbus-regulator: update example node name I've followed the prefix style of recent commits in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ 475043fabe8c regulator: Fix qcom,spmi-regulator schema b0de7fa70650 regulator: pca9450: Remove restrictions for regulator-name 4c7da3741804 regulator: Add missing type for 'regulator-microvolt-offset' 91de5eb17c10 regulator: pwm: Update Lee Jones' email address 044750573903 regulator: qcom,spmi-regulator: add PMP8074 PMIC 0b3bbd7646b0 regulator: qcom,spmi-regulator: Convert to dtschema 8cbb948a7cc2 regulator: dt-bindings: qcom,smd-rpm: Add PM8909 a9369fd316cf regulator: dt-bindings: Convert pwm-regulator to DT schema Regards Luca
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 18:39:32 +0100, Luca Weiss wrote: > usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the > example to match. > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz> > --- > Changes in v2: > * New patch > > .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
On 02/11/2022 06:38, Neil Armstrong wrote: > Hi, > > On 31/10/2022 18:39, Luca Weiss wrote: >> usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the >> example to match. > > Subject is wrong, should be something like: > dt-bindings: regulator: qcom,usb-vbus-regulator: update example node name > No, subject is correct. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Montag, 31. Oktober 2022 18:39:32 CET Luca Weiss wrote: > usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the > example to match. > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz> Bump? Can this patch be picked up please? > --- > Changes in v2: > * New patch > > .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml > index dbe78cd4adba..b1cff3adb21b 100644 > --- > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml > +++ > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ examples: > pm8150b { > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <0>; > - pm8150b_vbus: dcdc@1100 { > + pm8150b_vbus: usb-vbus-regulator@1100 { > compatible = "qcom,pm8150b-vbus-reg"; > reg = <0x1100>; > };
On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 10:30:47PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote: > On Montag, 31. Oktober 2022 18:39:32 CET Luca Weiss wrote: > > usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the > > example to match. > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz> > > Bump? Can this patch be picked up please? Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time for review. People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes) please allow at least a couple of weeks for review. If there have been review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed. Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches for the subsystem are normally handled.
On Donnerstag, 29. Dezember 2022 18:57:15 CET Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 10:30:47PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote: > > On Montag, 31. Oktober 2022 18:39:32 CET Luca Weiss wrote: > > > usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the > > > example to match. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz> > > > > Bump? Can this patch be picked up please? > > Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time > for review. People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so > on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes) > please allow at least a couple of weeks for review. If there have been > review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed. The patch was sent end of October, that is two months ago. I don't think two months of waiting is an unreasonable amount of time and is also more than "a couple of weeks"... And as far as I am aware there's no open review comments, which is why I did send the email to ask what the status is so that it can go into 6.3 and I can remove it from my inbox. Regards Luca > > Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at > all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed > directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches > anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are > some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches > for the subsystem are normally handled.
On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 07:11:10PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote: > The patch was sent end of October, that is two months ago. I don't think two > months of waiting is an unreasonable amount of time and is also more than "a > couple of weeks"... > And as far as I am aware there's no open review comments, which is why I did > send the email to ask what the status is so that it can go into 6.3 and I can > remove it from my inbox. Please read the rest of the mail: > > directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches > > anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are > > some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches > > for the subsystem are normally handled. I can't do anything with your content free ping on patch 2 of some series...
On Donnerstag, 29. Dezember 2022 19:43:08 CET Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 07:11:10PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote: > > The patch was sent end of October, that is two months ago. I don't think > > two months of waiting is an unreasonable amount of time and is also more > > than "a couple of weeks"... > > > > And as far as I am aware there's no open review comments, which is why I > > did send the email to ask what the status is so that it can go into 6.3 > > and I can remove it from my inbox. > > Please read the rest of the mail: > > > directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches > > > anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are > > > some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches > > > for the subsystem are normally handled. > > I can't do anything with your content free ping on patch 2 of > some series... I'll just resend, that should alleviate all problems.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml index dbe78cd4adba..b1cff3adb21b 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ examples: pm8150b { #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; - pm8150b_vbus: dcdc@1100 { + pm8150b_vbus: usb-vbus-regulator@1100 { compatible = "qcom,pm8150b-vbus-reg"; reg = <0x1100>; };
usb-vbus-regulator is a better generic node name than dcdc to change the example to match. Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz> --- Changes in v2: * New patch .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,usb-vbus-regulator.yaml | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)