> -----Original Message----- > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2024 2:45 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 1/8] dt-bindings: media: platform: visconti: Add > Toshiba Visconti MIPI CSI-2 Receiver > > On 17/12/2024 00:57, yuji2.ishikawa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> On 25/11/2024 10:21, Yuji Ishikawa wrote: > >>> Adds the Device Tree binding documentation that allows to describe > >>> the MIPI CSI-2 Receiver found in Toshiba Visconti SoCs. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Yuji Ishikawa <yuji2.ishikawa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Reviewed-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> > >> How newly added patch can have already Rb tag? Was this review > >> really, really performed internally or you just satisfy some internal > >> managers requirements and fake the stats? > >> > > > > I added this Reviewed-by tag because the patch was reviewed internally. > > > What issues were identified by internal review, especially in the context of > bindings? > The review was insufficient. We discussed the splitting of drivers, but overlooked the schema. I should have been more careful not to add an inappropriate tag. I apologize for not understanding the attention and respect that should be given to the Reviewed-by tag.
