Dear Kozlowski, We just got where we did wrong by reading twice about the generic-name-recommendation document and comparing our PATCHes with others. We will make a new PATCH v5 addressing all the comments. Thanks for your patient. We felt sincerely sorry. Recards. Yuteng Zhong, DHDAXCW. ty <zonyitoo@xxxxxxxxx> 于2022年12月21日周三 17:18写道： > > Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2022年12月21日周三 17:05写道： > > > > On 21/12/2022 10:01, ty wrote: > > > thanks. I am really sorry. > > > > > > I fixed this based on your feedback in the PATCH V2 content. Regarding > > > the dts issue, I used the kernel-5.15 kernel adaptation before, which > > > may not be perfect at that time. > > > > Do not send patches based on v5.15. This is some very old kernel. We do > > not work on such stuff. > > Thank you for your kindly reminder. We have modified the whole .dts > file based on v6.2 kernel and follow the generic-name-regulation[0] in > [PATCH v4]. Because it was basically a whole rewrite, so I decided to > send a new PATCH v4. > > [0] https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation > > > > > The comment was: > > "Node names should be generic, so at least with regulator prefix or suffix." > > Yes. Node names are all changed in [PATCH v4].
