From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.zeus03.de (zeus03.de [194.117.254.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B9CC256C91 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2025 08:19:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760084395; cv=none; b=DG195kaDbDMrbxOEksp6YSPKJp8GVIFArqpBCD52lXL4W163kQeBIvrVEJMvr4eg03NZqPfDfUTbBOrIFHjBgwg7ie7uZ7YRaG5GsYvhcibC7rdxfTUnOGNAEnzDFYGCDSfUqZew9oJj7fx2So+MpsEf4dSAb4/LUosSPZtxrDw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760084395; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SnjZQPLxdOXsa48lEt5gzOZhrdGJoADrLSwnnLVOCw8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=UyEAH/w5nc8e66mrCEukBhDdb7cAw+LuR6/ophWhNUnmtDLJRbXbBCsZOIrsM7LpxXUyGM+DHO2W5dKYazRDrAhOALt8GZHdb3KhL18diDTf28cLX8NADBHfhEmk47yahg1g9Nu8aTy5L/huxfeE5b13QXkHt+bhn2S214hGT88= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b=Tw/aKEOF; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b="Tw/aKEOF" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= sang-engineering.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=k1; bh=SnjZ QPLxdOXsa48lEt5gzOZhrdGJoADrLSwnnLVOCw8=; b=Tw/aKEOFe8g5TTsoPRu4 c6CvJD/uLDDS/3lc5jVEtJJpw8vyE+I9nDoJLWjcAIluQofd6U63sPi/863rft5K ujupfdv7eC5igGq0ZCabPHgGWodIhAIsGyBwptt/gPw+8+P9JsNImLTsJwNrEa1o EvZqkIKGxGlNb4Z7xyKxb4reSdi8YAz06gGn/fthroucLWi/lt7GCW2ghJkNNmjz LweTwaPyxgv6Taa7PwlHmnD2tnbhPSrcfvCzDCyBcNKGIegBOPZcwiNJQVY+C0Zu 9jBoWgU+iw4BaNRRBrYlK+sFsszlINpYmu71RYQXMF/m9ipgOGbZXBUHr6g5PCup 6A== Received: (qmail 1388560 invoked from network); 10 Oct 2025 10:19:51 +0200 Received: by mail.zeus03.de with UTF8SMTPSA (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted, authenticated); 10 Oct 2025 10:19:51 +0200 X-UD-Smtp-Session: l3s3148p1@iOrplMlAYssgAwDPXwQHAL/S9V79e5yL Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 10:19:51 +0200 From: Wolfram Sang To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , Lee Jones , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Magnus Damm , devicetree@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mfd: Add Renesas R2A11302FT PMIC Message-ID: References: <20251009181916.2431-2-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> <08b7a21a-72f7-47e4-9dc9-37a7316f94d5@kernel.org> <6ae23e44-2263-4cbe-aae1-d056597cd543@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="LWoOXpGGf7E/uV/P" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6ae23e44-2263-4cbe-aae1-d056597cd543@kernel.org> --LWoOXpGGf7E/uV/P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Adding this PMIC to trivial devices would be my fav solution, actually. >=20 > I meant, that not being complete is not yet problem. Ok, good. > Heh? I said your numbering is wrong. RFC was v1, this is v2. >=20 > Your broken numbering breaks tools. Try yourself: >=20 > b4 diff '<20251009181916.2431-2-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>' I don't have b4, so I can't try. For 10+ years, I have been numbering like this: RFC, RFC v2, ... And once the patch leaves RFC status, switch to : PATCH, PATCH v2, ... It still makes sense to me and noone complained so far IIRC. I can switch to continous numbering if it makes other people happy. > If you have it in DTS, then you need the binding. Just write it as much > as complete as possible, mention incompleteness in binding description > and provide reasons of incompleteness in commit msg. Okay, that was my intention right away. So, I will do that, add unevaluatedProperties and fix the spacing and we are good to go then? --LWoOXpGGf7E/uV/P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEOZGx6rniZ1Gk92RdFA3kzBSgKbYFAmjowaYACgkQFA3kzBSg KbZIhw//eJ1zzZj6d85/kzsbniaYlggkuvn+Z2ygBTA+zR+hyqWY5g3DqWbt5yAO f/yNniS7N1Tag6/ERSQ/uMJhldB0p8uTAtYbZRr7Jd4uDqSDOKEh6Kf177CFfNKj Dif/m1cYqSGj5ncN1iRicIuhVOK34GoR/xnPI2V1mnrSy4yzpRZCBScOOmID0PaS anxdMy+1NpDPNLmcq0eDGJS/+eFoVYmKeptSNBLmtP77AgZwtAHTDZaPpoZ4zFE8 YvDnNZFnIOn3IHn3+xXI/5vHZC1vYgUUr0IaSm1/7ZceBfqdSIwycsE6rjZDjqUb FNOuear6fTgagV1QA+0jArkWGLetuvP2q3emoSHKxjpblV0dhWLSiDmMfTcqp1Cs kpMDoqyuuTd4bI3oK9PsCJYP7wdfPi1TwFEsZENY09DWtruSiqOVAM+qSG9Q/HpV w0MfzTEMycwjYqrQ+E9oI1FZzhxGB8INuVl951cDO0M2/U9IyP0eJqMPXY+uDUSp P6N/uTW1BUYXgbFda+Ty9QO7yctNHH038evY21C4NOEq2zlR481GpRyQPs76ksLy 1qFCNLyTEzlHmuaNqlIzSZU7OGEd6tCAz6kMVtxd9vGpuNml6NOx30Pj4ioAFsG1 sJ+eGnNZDoqKoYy2FHx39tKFJC+pc/nTnz1NUaRvP6Ogs1i9394= =Loy2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --LWoOXpGGf7E/uV/P--