From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.153.233]) (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 6FD14134A3; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:49:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=microchip.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=microchip.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=microchip.com header.i=@microchip.com header.b="gdhuVufm" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1705398556; x=1736934556; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=d/LmQtM6md3wSSgxarWeNXc3nWd8MVX7G2TVJesXeRI=; b=gdhuVufmQweEZdMW3E7ZUIv6G1cfEN1gkw0ENXJTLp8XcOhoKIkrlRI5 6AOcp1hgcS672eIXnEeCM2HVETVikdFy9Klp/qixXCVOvnhHT7VngWyTm /n5ugSPEJqnE5BZuvkah2ovUeqXp6t+YpXbO9P/t/zDywOu0QJVSZh9D7 QAxRU8BgbZ/g7ybjkSF2QL629HExTWzWhyIJyd2QwyPXKrLMjHAE1rXF+ IgiqMiypMziiz2ouEX2LWK9VuzCZEB8/LD6Js8FK7trQU6/bStK3MObZP oAiylVyC5kSlKiKbwhx3ggGX6PbUyxiT+LyrLSAbCQ4fzYkMdBDVNYL9u g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: lhV4ifIESgq7KLyVEfkQ/Q== X-CSE-MsgGUID: H9BXj9zQRVij7q1BDAfNUw== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.04,198,1695711600"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="245529089" X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa5.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256; 16 Jan 2024 02:49:15 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex02.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.144) by chn-vm-ex03.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 02:48:47 -0700 Received: from wendy (10.10.85.11) by chn-vm-ex02.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 02:48:44 -0700 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:48:08 +0000 From: Conor Dooley To: Krzysztof Kozlowski CC: Frank Li , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] dt-bindings: i3c: svc: add compatible string i3c: silvaco,i3c-target-v1 Message-ID: <20240116-achiness-thievish-10a12b3c08cd@wendy> References: <3c0be658-e7a6-4231-b206-86ffb47e0cb2@linaro.org> <1b628901-7f71-4c97-9a16-723912988417@linaro.org> <20240116-bleach-herbicide-48d636967134@wendy> <3199c245-3d2d-49e8-951e-2b059de4d683@linaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lyAJBZzxW05Or8+L" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3199c245-3d2d-49e8-951e-2b059de4d683@linaro.org> --lyAJBZzxW05Or8+L Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 10:33:48AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 16/01/2024 10:30, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 08:24:20AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 16/01/2024 03:29, Frank Li wrote: > >>>>> Patches were accepted after discussion, what you ponit to. So I > >>>>> think everyone agree on the name 'silvaco,i3c-master-v1'. > >>>>> I plan send next version to fix auto build error. Any additional > >>>>> comments about this? > >>>> > >>>> I still do not see how did you address Rob's comment and his point is > >>>> valid. You just did not reply to it. > >>> > >>> See https://lore.kernel.org/imx/ZXCiaKfMYYShoiXK@lizhi-Precision-Towe= r-5810/ > >> > >> First of all, that's not the answer to Rob's email, but some other > >> thread which is 99% ignored by Rob (unless he has filters for > >> "@Rob"...). Therefore no, it does not count as valid answer. > >> > >> Second, explanation does not make sense. There is no argument granting > >> you exception from SoC specific compatibles. > >=20 > > The patch could have been applied two months ago had Frank done as > > was requested (multiple times). I don't understand the resistance > > towards doing so given the process has taken way way longer as a result. >=20 > I think that Rob's comment was just skipped and original master binding > was merged without addressing it. I don't want to repeat the same > process for the "target". Indeed I could point this earlier... if I only > knew that Rob pointed out that issue. Oh I think I got confused here. The context for this mail led me to think that this was still trying to push the i3c-master-v1 stuff through and I was commenting on my frustration with the resistance to applying the feedback received. I didn't realise that this was for another patch adding a target. I think you already said it, but NAK to adding any more compatibles here until the soc-specific compatible that was asked for for the imx93 is added. Thanks, Conor. --lyAJBZzxW05Or8+L Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCZaZQ2AAKCRB4tDGHoIJi 0pPQAPwOtqo+AaPupCQJlV+rWAmSvitBpzmIYrOAkGb6DlqLfAEAkGGgrQwVHqSi f4RUVEYgW3INJX+Bf9bl1aY22t/R4gw= =o8PF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lyAJBZzxW05Or8+L--