| Message ID | 20230526161129.1454-4-quic_anusha@quicinc.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Enable crypto for ipq9574 | expand |
> Document the compatible string for ipq9574. > > Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> > Reviewed-by: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Anusha Rao <quic_anusha@quicinc.com> > --- > Changes in V4: > - Picked up Reviewed-by tag. A gentle reminder to pick the dt-binding patch. As the dts change is picked, this patch is required to resolve dt-bindings check issues.
On 23/06/2023 13:55, Anusha Rao wrote: >> Document the compatible string for ipq9574. >> >> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> >> Reviewed-by: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org> >> Signed-off-by: Anusha Rao <quic_anusha@quicinc.com> >> --- >> Changes in V4: >> - Picked up Reviewed-by tag. > > A gentle reminder to pick the dt-binding patch. > As the dts change is picked, this patch is required to resolve dt-bindings check issues. One patchset with four patches targeting three different subsystems, so no wonder it gets missed. You will usually receive better results with splitting such patchsets per subsystems. One more thing is lack of proper subject prefix which indicates the subsystem. Without it why anyone would pick it up? For example me, I would just ignore it for my subsystem... Best regards, Krzysztof
On 6/23/2023 6:23 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 23/06/2023 13:55, Anusha Rao wrote: >>> Document the compatible string for ipq9574. >>> >>> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> >>> Reviewed-by: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org> >>> Signed-off-by: Anusha Rao <quic_anusha@quicinc.com> >>> --- >>> Changes in V4: >>> - Picked up Reviewed-by tag. >> A gentle reminder to pick the dt-binding patch. >> As the dts change is picked, this patch is required to resolve dt-bindings check issues. > One patchset with four patches targeting three different subsystems, so > no wonder it gets missed. You will usually receive better results with > splitting such patchsets per subsystems. > > One more thing is lack of proper subject prefix which indicates the > subsystem. Without it why anyone would pick it up? For example me, I > would just ignore it for my subsystem... Ok..Referred previous commit titles of this file and added subject prefix. Do you suggest to repost it with "dt-bindings: crypto: qcom-qce: add SoC compatible string for ipq9574" ? Thanks, Anusha > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.yaml index e375bd981300..0d1deae06e2d 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.yaml @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ properties: - enum: - qcom,ipq6018-qce - qcom,ipq8074-qce + - qcom,ipq9574-qce - qcom,msm8996-qce - qcom,sdm845-qce - const: qcom,ipq4019-qce