> -----Original Message----- > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2024 2:43 PM > To: ishikawa yuji(石川 悠司 ○ＲＤＣ□ＡＩＴＣ○ＥＡ開) > <yuji2.ishikawa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx; robh@xxxxxxxxxx; krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; > conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; hverkuil-cisco@xxxxxxxxx; > iwamatsu nobuhiro(岩松 信洋 ○ＤＩＴＣ□ＤＩＴ○ＯＳＴ) > <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/8] dt-bindings: media: platform: visconti: Add > Toshiba Visconti Video Input Interface > > On 17/12/2024 01:00, yuji2.ishikawa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Hello Krzysztof > > > > Thank you for your review > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2024 7:08 PM > >> To: ishikawa yuji(石川 悠司 ○ＲＤＣ□ＡＩＴＣ○ＥＡ開) > >> <yuji2.ishikawa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Laurent Pinchart > >> <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mauro Carvalho Chehab > >> <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof > >> Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; > >> Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Hans Verkuil > >> <hverkuil-cisco@xxxxxxxxx>; iwamatsu nobuhiro(岩松 信洋 ○ＤＩＴＣ□ＤＩ > Ｔ○ＯＳＴ) > >> <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > >> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/8] dt-bindings: media: platform: visconti: > >> Add Toshiba Visconti Video Input Interface > >> > >> On 25/11/2024 10:21, Yuji Ishikawa wrote: > >>> Adds the Device Tree binding documentation that allows to describe > >>> the Video Input Interface found in Toshiba Visconti SoCs. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Yuji Ishikawa <yuji2.ishikawa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Reviewed-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Why this tag stayed and other was removed? What was the reason of tag > >> removal? > >> > > > > The stayed tag is due to internal review. > > Did the internal review really happened? How is it that immediately new version > has internal review without any traces? > > I have doubts this review happened in the context of reviewer's statement of > oversight. > > > > The removed tag is due to code's change (split of csi2rx part) after the last > review. > > If the code is largely changed following the instruction of another > > reviewer after obtaining the tags, how should the tags be handled? > > Drop all reviews and perform reviews on the list. > > Such internal review appearing afterwards is rather a proof it you are adding > just the tags to satisfy your process. I have no way to even verify whether that > person performed any reasonable review or maybe just acked your patch. I > cannot even verify that that person understands the reviewer's statement of > oversight. > I understand the importance and usage of the Reviewed-by tag. We will continue to conduct internal reviews, but from now on, I will add the tag to reviews discussed in the open mailing list. > > ... > > >>> > >>> Changelog v11: > >>> - no change > >>> > >>> Changelog v12: > >>> - remove property "clock-noncontinuous" as VIIF switches both modes > >>> automatically > >>> - remove property "link-frequencies" as VIIF does not use the > >>> information > >> > >> Driver does not use or hardware supports only one frequency? > >> > > > > My comment was incorrect. > > It should be "Driver does not use the information" > > Then this is not that helping. Maybe hardware supports only one frequency? > The reason for the removal is the hardware PLL is configured using information from the sensor's V4L2_CID_PIXEL_RATE control. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Best regards, Yuji Ishikawa
