On 18/05/2022 17:47, Radhey Shyam Pandey wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2022 2:23 PM >> To: Radhey Shyam Pandey <radheys@xxxxxxxxxx>; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; >> edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; >> robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; Harini Katakam >> <harinik@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- >> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; git <git@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] dt-bindings: net: xilinx: document xilinx emaclite >> driver binding >> >> On 12/05/2022 18:39, Radhey Shyam Pandey wrote: >>> Add basic description for the xilinx emaclite driver DT bindings. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Radhey Shyam Pandey <radhey.shyam.pandey@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../bindings/net/xlnx,emaclite.yaml | 60 +++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/xlnx,emaclite.yaml >> >> Why is this RFC? Do you expect DT maintainers review or not? Maybe there is >> no point for us to review something which is not going to be applied? > > I intentionally made it RFC so that all aspects are reviewed as this driver didn't > had an existing binding. I will send out next version with below comment > addressed. Thanks! RFC means you develop something which is not ready, not sure how to do it, you send an initial idea. Sending a regular bindings as RFC, without explaining what you expect, is a bit confusing. Best regards, Krzysztof
