Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom-spmi-pmic: Add pm6125 compatible

[Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>]

On 2022-09-28 10:14:05, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 28/09/2022 10:10, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> > On 2022-09-28 09:35:40, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 26/09/2022 21:01, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> >>> Document support for the pm6125, typically paired with the sm6125 SoC.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>
> >>> ---
> >>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom,spmi-pmic.yaml | 1 +
> >>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>
> >>
> >> Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by tags when posting new versions. However,
> >> there's no need to repost patches *only* to add the tags. The upstream
> >> maintainer will do that for acks received on the version they apply.
> >>
> >> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.17/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L540
> >>
> >> If a tag was not added on purpose, please state why and what changed.
> >>
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/0ec65132-7d7a-2f8d-cc16-cb76efc343d6@linaro.org/
> > 
> > Thanks, I thought of it this morning while browsing lore, but only got
> > to a screen just now so you beat me to it by ~30 minutes.
> > 
> > No need to lecture me on the rules, but I can't promise this won't
> > happen again.
> 
> 
> This is a automated message, don't get it too personal. A lot of people
> are not aware they have to do it, so I just one, same reply. I don't
> know whether you are aware of the process and just forgot to include it.
> If that's the case, just ignore the message.

That's useful, what software are you using for this?  Perhaps I can run
it as well, both to preempt myself and others.
(Side-note: I should get accustomed to `b4 shazam` to automatically pick
 this up from the list, instead of rebasing / re-applying local patches)

- Marijn