Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: adc: add AD7173

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 23/11/2023 16:11, Ceclan Dumitru wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/23/23 16:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 23/11/2023 15:02, mitrutzceclan wrote:
>>> +  Bindings for the Analog Devices AD717X ADC's. Datasheets for supported chips:
>>
>> Drop "Bindings for" and instead describe hardware.
>>
> 
> Okay
> 
> ...
> 
>>> +  avdd-supply:
>>> +    description: avdd supply, can be used as reference for conversion.
>>> +
>>> +  required:
>>
>> Please test your code before sending. You ignored my comment. This has
>> both wrong indentation and wrong placement - should be after all
>> properties and patternProperties.
>>
>> Do not ignore comments but respond to them.
>>
> 
> There were no errors while testing the yaml binding (with
> DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check - to make sure that this is how
> bindings should be tested). Indeed I did not test the yaml if the
> required properties are missing from the example. What is indicative in
> this patch that it was not tested?

Then your testing method might miss something, because as you can see -
Rob's bot found the issue.

> 
> I did not ignore your comment. I did not have questions about it. I
> missed the indentation. Sorry about that.
> 
> But about the placement of 'required': the example-schema does not have
> the exact case of pattern properties. Also, there are multiple iio/adc
> (ad4130, ad7124, ad7292) bindings that place required before
> patternProperties. I assumed that this placement is correct.
> 
> Will move it in next version.
> 
> In regards to responding to comments: if there are no questions about a
> comment and will fix in next version, should there be a response anyway
> just confirming it?

The point is that code did not change here and there was no
Ack/Done/something reply.

Best regards,
Krzysztof