On 17/07/2023 08:34, Li, Hua Qian wrote: > On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 08:27 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 17/07/2023 08:24, Li, Hua Qian wrote: >>> On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 08:16 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 17/07/2023 06:07, huaqian.li@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>>> From: Li Hua Qian <huaqian.li@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> The watchdog hardware of TI AM65X platform does not support >>>>> WDIOF_CARDRESET feature, add a reserved memory to save the >>>>> watchdog >>>>> reset cause, to know if the board reboot is due to a watchdog >>>>> reset. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Li Hua Qian <huaqian.li@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> Changes in v4: >>>>> - Fix the coding style. >>>>> - Add usage note for the reserved memory. >>>>> - Link to v3: >>>>> >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-watchdog/20230713095127.1230109-1-huaqian.li@xxxxxxxxxxx >>>> >>>> Much more changed. You added example in the bindings which no one >>>> asked >>>> for. Then you added multiple fake review tags to all the patches. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Krzysztof >>>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Sorry for the wrong statement. I missed some key information and >>> missunderstood `Reviewed-by`, I treated `Reviewed-by` as `Who >>> has reviewed`. >> >> But you don't have even that information who has reviewed! Where do >> you >> see any reviews coming from me for patch #2? Where do you see reviews >> from Rob for patch #3? >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >> > I got these information from my email thread. Anyway I made a stupid > mistake, sorry for wasting your time. > > By the way, when you wrote the following in '[PATCH v3 1/3] dt- > bindings: watchdog: ti,rti-wdt: Add support for WDIOF_CARDRESET', you > were kind of saying that it looks good to you if I remove the extra > empty line, right? > > In any case: > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> This was patch 1. But you added my review to patch 2 also. Why then not adding to patch 3? What logic is driving this? Best regards, Krzysztof
