On 06/09/2024 13:21, Vikash Garodia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> ret = v4l2_device_register(dev, &core->v4l2_dev);
>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>> return ret;
>>>>> @@ -88,8 +101,14 @@ static int iris_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> static const struct of_device_id iris_dt_match[] = {
>>>>> - { .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-iris", },
>>>>> - { .compatible = "qcom,sm8250-venus", },
>>>>> + {
>>>>> + .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-iris",
>>>>> + .data = &sm8550_data,
>>>>> + },
>>>>> + {
>>>>> + .compatible = "qcom,sm8250-venus",
>>>>> + .data = &sm8250_data,
>>>>
>>>> You just added this. No, please do not add code which is immediatly
>>>> incorrect.
>>> It's not incorrect, in earlier patch we only added the compatible strings
>>> and with this patch introducing the platform data and APIs to get it.
>>
>> It is incorrect to immediately remove it. You keep arguing on basic
>> stuff. Sorry, but that is not how it works. If you add code and
>> IMMEDIATELY remove it, then it means the code was not needed. Or was not
>> correct. Choose one.
> I think it is not removing it. It is adding platform data to compatibles
> introduced in previous patch. Maybe it appears as if it is removing it.
I know how the diff works.
The way you avoid solving the problem with trivial responses is not
helping. We already have been there with another patchset from different
person and it lead to annoying all DT maintainers and (usually very
patient) some of networking folks. I ask you to approach to the review
seriously.
NAK.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
