On 12/02/2025 00:57, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 12:50:12PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 11/02/2025 12:46, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 11/02/2025 12:15, Satya Priya Kakitapalli wrote: >>>> >>>> On 12/13/2024 2:08 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 09:41:20PM +0530, Satya Priya Kakitapalli wrote: >>>>>> + >>>>>> +required: >>>>>> + - compatible >>>>>> + - reg >>>>>> + - interrupts >>>>>> + - io-channels >>>>>> + - io-channel-names >>>>> Binding looks ok, but this wasn't tested due to unneeded dependency. >>>>> Please decouple from dependency, so automation can properly test it. >>>> >>>> >>>> The dependency is needed because this mbg peripheral is present on only >>>> targets which have GEN3 ADC5, for which the bindings support is added in >>>> the series [1] >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/c4ca0a4c-e421-4cf6-b073-8e9019400f4c@xxxxxxxxxxx/ >>> >>> Sure. Then this cannot be merged due to resulting test failure. >>> >>> Please don't post new versions before this can be actually tested and >>> applied. >> >> Heh, you responded *after two months*, to an old email so even previous >> discussion is gone from my inbox. > > Are you responding to your own email? Look at the timeline of these emails. Satya responded after two months with some comment. I responded now. Then I noticed that it is talk about something two months old, so I responded again. Two responses from me, that's correct. I recently got way too many such 2-month old clarifications. That's indeed right of the contributor to respond in their own pace, I am also sometimes slow, but really there should be some limit. It's putting unnecessary burden on reviewers as now I should dig some old discussion. Best regards, Krzysztof
