| Message ID | 20250102175006.3675-2-lukas.schmid@netcube.li (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,1/3] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: Add NetCube Systems Austria name | expand |
On 02/01/2025 18:49, Lukas Schmid wrote: > Signed-off-by: Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++ You did not read really the messages we gave you... 1. Read what I wrote in my first reply for v1. I gave detailed instruction to avoid the exact mistake you now did. 2. Read again Andre's reply. 3. Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads (unrelated or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox and might interfere with applying entire sets. 4. Next version, with proper cover letter, is after 24h, so you have some time to digest the feedback. Best regards, Krzysztof
Am 2025-01-02 18:57, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: > On 02/01/2025 18:49, Lukas Schmid wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li> >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++ > > You did not read really the messages we gave you... > > 1. Read what I wrote in my first reply for v1. I gave detailed > instruction to avoid the exact mistake you now did. > > 2. Read again Andre's reply. > > 3. Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads > (unrelated or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox and > might interfere with applying entire sets. > > 4. Next version, with proper cover letter, is after 24h, so you have > some time to digest the feedback. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Hi, Thank you for your feedback, and I sincerely apologize for the mistakes in my submission process. I did read Andre's reply and your feedback on v1, but unfortunately, I had already sent the v2 series as a reply before fully understanding all the recommendations. I realize now that this was a misstep and caused confusion. I will wait until tomorrow, around 20:00, to send the v3 series. I will make sure to include a proper cover letter and ensure that all the feedback from v1 and v2 is addressed. Regarding the v1 feedback, I thought I had incorporated all your suggestions. However, after rereading it, I seem to have missed something critical. Could you please point out what I might have overlooked? I want to make sure I fully understand and correct it in the next iteration. Thank you for your patience and for helping me improve my submission process. Best regards, Lukas Schmid
On 02/01/2025 19:24, Lukas Schmid wrote: > Am 2025-01-02 18:57, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: >> On 02/01/2025 18:49, Lukas Schmid wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++ >> >> You did not read really the messages we gave you... >> >> 1. Read what I wrote in my first reply for v1. I gave detailed >> instruction to avoid the exact mistake you now did. >> >> 2. Read again Andre's reply. >> >> 3. Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads >> (unrelated or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox and >> might interfere with applying entire sets. >> >> 4. Next version, with proper cover letter, is after 24h, so you have >> some time to digest the feedback. >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > > Hi, > > Thank you for your feedback, and I sincerely apologize for the mistakes > in my submission process. > > I did read Andre's reply and your feedback on v1, but unfortunately, I > had already sent the v2 series as a reply before fully understanding all > the recommendations. I realize now that this was a misstep and caused > confusion. > > I will wait until tomorrow, around 20:00, to send the v3 series. I will > make sure to include a proper cover letter and ensure that all the > feedback from v1 and v2 is addressed. > > Regarding the v1 feedback, I thought I had incorporated all your > suggestions. However, after rereading it, I seem to have missed > something critical. Could you please point out what I might have > overlooked? I want to make sure I fully understand and correct it in the > next iteration. > Please read my full reply for v1 of this patch. How did you implement that feedback - long instruction? Best regards, Krzysztof
Am 2025-01-02 19:31, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: > On 02/01/2025 19:24, Lukas Schmid wrote: >> Am 2025-01-02 18:57, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: >>> On 02/01/2025 18:49, Lukas Schmid wrote: >>>> Signed-off-by: Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li> >>>> --- >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++ >>> >>> You did not read really the messages we gave you... >>> >>> 1. Read what I wrote in my first reply for v1. I gave detailed >>> instruction to avoid the exact mistake you now did. >>> >>> 2. Read again Andre's reply. >>> >>> 3. Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads >>> (unrelated or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox >>> and >>> might interfere with applying entire sets. >>> >>> 4. Next version, with proper cover letter, is after 24h, so you have >>> some time to digest the feedback. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Krzysztof >> >> Hi, >> >> Thank you for your feedback, and I sincerely apologize for the >> mistakes >> in my submission process. >> >> I did read Andre's reply and your feedback on v1, but unfortunately, I >> had already sent the v2 series as a reply before fully understanding >> all >> the recommendations. I realize now that this was a misstep and caused >> confusion. >> >> I will wait until tomorrow, around 20:00, to send the v3 series. I >> will >> make sure to include a proper cover letter and ensure that all the >> feedback from v1 and v2 is addressed. >> >> Regarding the v1 feedback, I thought I had incorporated all your >> suggestions. However, after rereading it, I seem to have missed >> something critical. Could you please point out what I might have >> overlooked? I want to make sure I fully understand and correct it in >> the >> next iteration. >> > Please read my full reply for v1 of this patch. How did you implement > that feedback - long instruction? > > Best regards, > Krzysztof I assume by 'long instruction' you mean checking the devicetree using 'make dtbs_check W=1'. I did run dtbs_check after already applying some of the changes you had recommended. I just had a look at it's output again, and see now that there is one more issue about 'pinctrl@1c20800: 'gpio-reserved-ranges' does not match any of the regexes'. Is this what you mean? If thats the case I'd assume I should add another patch which adds the 'gpio-reserved-ranges' property to the 'devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml' file. Best regards, Lukas
On 02/01/2025 19:48, Lukas Schmid wrote: > Am 2025-01-02 19:31, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: >> On 02/01/2025 19:24, Lukas Schmid wrote: >>> Am 2025-01-02 18:57, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: >>>> On 02/01/2025 18:49, Lukas Schmid wrote: >>>>> Signed-off-by: Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li> >>>>> --- >>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++ >>>> >>>> You did not read really the messages we gave you... >>>> >>>> 1. Read what I wrote in my first reply for v1. I gave detailed >>>> instruction to avoid the exact mistake you now did. >>>> >>>> 2. Read again Andre's reply. >>>> >>>> 3. Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads >>>> (unrelated or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox >>>> and >>>> might interfere with applying entire sets. >>>> >>>> 4. Next version, with proper cover letter, is after 24h, so you have >>>> some time to digest the feedback. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Krzysztof >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thank you for your feedback, and I sincerely apologize for the >>> mistakes >>> in my submission process. >>> >>> I did read Andre's reply and your feedback on v1, but unfortunately, I >>> had already sent the v2 series as a reply before fully understanding >>> all >>> the recommendations. I realize now that this was a misstep and caused >>> confusion. >>> >>> I will wait until tomorrow, around 20:00, to send the v3 series. I >>> will >>> make sure to include a proper cover letter and ensure that all the >>> feedback from v1 and v2 is addressed. >>> >>> Regarding the v1 feedback, I thought I had incorporated all your >>> suggestions. However, after rereading it, I seem to have missed >>> something critical. Could you please point out what I might have >>> overlooked? I want to make sure I fully understand and correct it in >>> the >>> next iteration. >>> >> Please read my full reply for v1 of this patch. How did you implement >> that feedback - long instruction? >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > > I assume by 'long instruction' you mean checking the devicetree using > 'make dtbs_check W=1'. There was nothing like that. Again, we talk about this patch, not other. You refer now to other patch. Best regards, Krzysztof
Am 2025-01-02 21:59, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: > On 02/01/2025 19:48, Lukas Schmid wrote: >> Am 2025-01-02 19:31, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: >>> On 02/01/2025 19:24, Lukas Schmid wrote: >>>> Am 2025-01-02 18:57, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: >>>>> On 02/01/2025 18:49, Lukas Schmid wrote: >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++ >>>>> >>>>> You did not read really the messages we gave you... >>>>> >>>>> 1. Read what I wrote in my first reply for v1. I gave detailed >>>>> instruction to avoid the exact mistake you now did. >>>>> >>>>> 2. Read again Andre's reply. >>>>> >>>>> 3. Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads >>>>> (unrelated or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox >>>>> and >>>>> might interfere with applying entire sets. >>>>> >>>>> 4. Next version, with proper cover letter, is after 24h, so you >>>>> have >>>>> some time to digest the feedback. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Krzysztof >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Thank you for your feedback, and I sincerely apologize for the >>>> mistakes >>>> in my submission process. >>>> >>>> I did read Andre's reply and your feedback on v1, but unfortunately, >>>> I >>>> had already sent the v2 series as a reply before fully understanding >>>> all >>>> the recommendations. I realize now that this was a misstep and >>>> caused >>>> confusion. >>>> >>>> I will wait until tomorrow, around 20:00, to send the v3 series. I >>>> will >>>> make sure to include a proper cover letter and ensure that all the >>>> feedback from v1 and v2 is addressed. >>>> >>>> Regarding the v1 feedback, I thought I had incorporated all your >>>> suggestions. However, after rereading it, I seem to have missed >>>> something critical. Could you please point out what I might have >>>> overlooked? I want to make sure I fully understand and correct it in >>>> the >>>> next iteration. >>>> >>> Please read my full reply for v1 of this patch. How did you implement >>> that feedback - long instruction? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Krzysztof >> >> I assume by 'long instruction' you mean checking the devicetree using >> 'make dtbs_check W=1'. > > There was nothing like that. Again, we talk about this patch, not > other. > You refer now to other patch. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Oh I see now. It's about the Acked-by. I have already added it to the commit-message of my clone. The V3 will have those two included. I have read the message from Andre, but unfortunately had already sent the new patches before I got the mail. I have already applied the tags. Best regards, Lukas
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml index da01616802c7..a30ed9547098 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml @@ -1027,6 +1027,8 @@ patternProperties: description: Neofidelity Inc. "^neonode,.*": description: Neonode Inc. + "^netcube,.*": + description: NetCube Systems Austria "^netgear,.*": description: NETGEAR "^netlogic,.*":
Signed-off-by: Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)