On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 11:37:31AM GMT, Neil Armstrong wrote: > On 06/06/2024 11:32, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 09:12:14AM GMT, Ryan Walklin wrote: > > > The WL-355608-A8 is a 3.5" 640x480@60Hz RGB LCD display used in a > > > number of handheld gaming devices made by Anbernic. By consensus a > > > vendor prefix is not provided as the panel OEM is unknown. > > > > Where has this consensus been found? > > > > I had a look at the previous discussions, and I can't find any consensus > > being reached there. And for that kind of thing, having the ack or > > review of any of the DT maintainers would have been great. > > There was a consensus with Conor, this is why he acked v2, see > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240525-velvet-citable-a45dd06847a7@spud/ It's probably a matter of semantics here, but if it's with only one person, it's not a consensus but an agreement. > ``` > I think if we genuinely do not know what the vendor is then we just > don't have a prefix. > ``` And even then, I don't interpret Conor's statement as a formal agreement but rather an acknowledgment of the issue. > I agree with Conor so I applied the patchset after Connor reviewed it and the comment was fixed in v3: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240530-satchel-playgroup-e8aa6937b8b9@spud/ Yeah, I know. Still, it's a major deviation to what we've always been doing, getting the DT maintainers voice on that would have been a good idea. Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
