Re: [RFC PATCH] dt-bindings: PCI: ti,j721e-pci-host: Add device-id for TI's J784S4 SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>]

On 08/01/2024 12:34, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Why is this patch incomplete? What is missing here? What are you asking
>>>> about as RFC?
>>>
>>> Since the merge window is closed, I was hoping to get the patch reviewed in
>>> order to get any "Reviewed-by" tags if possible. That way, I will be able to
>>> post it again as v1 along with the tags when the merge window opens. For that
>>
>> This is v1, so that would be v2.
>>
>>> reason, I have marked it as an RFC patch. Is there an alternative to this "RFC
>>> patch" method that I have followed? Please let me know.
>>
>> Then how does it differ from posting without RFC? Sorry, RFC is
>> incomplete work. Often ignored during review.
> 
> I was under the impression that posting patches when the merge window is closed
> will be met with a "post your patch later when the merge window is open"
> response. That is why I chose the "RFC patch" path since RFCs can be posted anytime.
> 
> For the Networking Subsystem, it is documented that patches with new features
> shouldn't be posted when the merge window is closed. I have mostly posted
> patches for the Networking Subsystem and am not sure about the rules for the
> device-tree bindings and PCI Subsystems. To be on the safe side I posted this
> patch as an RFC patch.

Ah, so you want to go around that policy by posting non-RFC patch as
RFC. It does not work like that.

Best regards,
Krzysztof