Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] dt-bindings: mmc: sdhci-msm: Add ICE phandle

[Neeraj Soni <neeraj.soni@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 6/15/2026 10:15 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 13/06/2026 07:21, Neeraj Soni wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/9/2026 5:19 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 09/06/2026 10:18, Neeraj Soni wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 6/8/2026 11:40 AM, Kuldeep Singh wrote:
>>>>> On 08-06-2026 09:46, Neeraj Soni wrote:
>>>>>> Starting with sc7280(kodiak), the ICE will have its own device-tree node.
>>>>>> So add the qcom,ice property to reference it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To avoid double-modeling, when qcom,ice is present, disallow an embedded
>>>>>> ICE register region in the SDHCI node. Older SoCs without ICE remain
>>>>>> valid as no additional requirement is imposed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Co-developed-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@linaro.org>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@linaro.org>
>>>>>> Co-developed-by: Abhinaba Rakshit <abhinaba.rakshit@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Abhinaba Rakshit <abhinaba.rakshit@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Kuldeep Singh <kuldeep.singh@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260310113557.348502-2-neeraj.soni@oss.qualcomm.com
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Neeraj Soni <neeraj.soni@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Link should go below "---" to specify previous discussions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Usually maintainers add link of patchset being merged here while merging
>>>>> changes in their tree but authors don't add it here.
>>>>>
>>>> Do not see any such restrictions here https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
>>>
>>> What do you provide that Link for? What does it bring?
>>>
>> Kuleep highlighted a concern with the usage of "Link:" tag. The link i
>> provided guides on posting patches to upstream linux. Wanted to highlight
>> what i folloed and I did not find any specific comment/line in the guide
>> which prohibits author to use "Link:" tag in trailer section. If there
> 
> This is reversed logic. You need to provide reasons WHY it is worth, not
> just claim it is not disallowed. Adding 100 Links to whatever website is
> not disallowed, so you are going to add them?
>
Ack. I understand your point on Author's responsibility.
 
>> are guidelines otherwise please let me know and i will correct and post
>> new patch.
> 
> The "Link:", not the URL itself. What does it bring? Linus made clear
> statement that you should not add links UNLESS you have a reason.
> 
> So please share the reason. If you do not have, DO NOT ADD any "Link:".
> 
Ack. The purpose was to only highlight what was reviewed but i understand
it was not necessary. I will fix and post v8.

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
Regards
Neeraj