On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 9:34 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 21/11/2024 13:26, Stanislav Jakubek wrote: > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but this patch seems incorrect to me. > > The 1st patch suggets that the sc9632-uart is incompatible with sc9836-uart, > > but here you make it fallback to it anyway. > > > > Also, both of the patches seem to have made it to linux-next without the > > reviews/Acks from maintainers. Maybe Greg was a bit too fast here :) > > Yeah, this looks odd and considering totally empty commit msg (nothing > useful there), it looks like wrong choice. > > Please explain the compatibility aspects. In the future: you have entire > commit msg to describe the hardware, instead of repeating the obvious - > what is visible from the diff. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Hi Krzysztof: Thank you very much for your review, we will correct it in patch v2. Thanks
