Re: [PATCH v7 1/6] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add bindings for QCS9075 SOC based board

[Wasim Nazir <quic_wasimn@quicinc.com>]

On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 06:26:40PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/05/2025 17:35, Wasim Nazir wrote:
> > On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 04:20:53PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 21/05/2025 16:08, Wasim Nazir wrote:
> >>> QCS9075 is compatible Industrial-IOT grade variant of SA8775p SOC.
> >>> Unlike QCS9100, it doesn't have safety monitoring feature of
> >>> Safety-Island(SAIL) subsystem, which affects thermal management.
> >>>
> >>> qcs9075-iq-9075-evk board is based on QCS9075 SOC.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Wasim Nazir <quic_wasimn@quicinc.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 7 +++++++
> >>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>
> >> This was already acked twice by two DT maintainers. Apparently we need
> >> the third one.
> > 
> > The previous acknowledgment has been removed due to changes in the code.
> > Since, here I have removed the som compatible so though of getting it
> > reviewed again. Som compatible is removed to make it align with other
> > sa8775p & its derivative targets which we are trying to refactor along with
> > Ride changes in other series.
> 
> Nothing was explained in cover letter and dropping tags needs explicit
> mentioning. Nothing explained about first tag being dropped, either!
> Read really carefully submitting patches and your internal guideline
> before sending patches.

I'm sorry about that; it wasn't intentional. I'll make sure to take care
of it next time. I do try to mention changes in the changelog, but I
understand now that it's not sufficient.

> 
> But that was not about it. It was about us spending 1 or 5 minutes on
> your patch every time, because you send something not ready which your
> company decides to change thus we need to spend time again, and then you
> change it again, which we need to spend time again... do you get the point?
> 

I have made the code changes to align with our discussion in the other
series [1] of changes for Ride. Let me know if we need further
discussion on this to conclude on DT structure for sa8775p & IQ9 targets.

[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/aCdAuTS4pg7arxwC@hu-wasimn-hyd.qualcomm.com/

> That is not fair. Your marketing changes should not cause more effort on
> us. And this is not the first time.

I truly appreciate all your efforts. I understand there have been
mistakes on our end, but we are learning a lot from this process. We are
noting valuable points to make our internal processes more efficient and
reduce multiple iterations.

> 
> At least I do not agree on that. Anyway, I explained my point of view to
> Bjorn and Konrad. I am not going to review this. Maybe you will be lucky
> with the third DT maintainer.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Regards,
Wasim