[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19946f94-db48-fe0d-722c-cbb45b8bd0ba@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2023 18:36:37 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Stanley Chang[昌育德]
<stanley_chang@...ltek.com>,
Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>
Cc: "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: usb: snps,dwc3: Add
'snps,global-regs-starting-offset' quirk
On 13/04/2023 16:58, Stanley Chang[昌育德] wrote:
>> On 13/04/2023 06:25, Stanley Chang wrote:
>>> Add a new 'snps,global-regs-starting-offset' DT to dwc3 core to remap
>>> the global register start address
>>>
>>> The RTK DHC SoCs were designed the global register address offset at
>>> 0x8100. The default address is at DWC3_GLOBALS_REGS_START (0xc100).
>>> Therefore, add the property of device-tree to adjust this start address.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stanley Chang <stanley_chang@...ltek.com>
>>> ---
>>> v1 to v2 change:
>>> 1. Change the name of the property "snps,global-regs-starting-offset".
>>> ---
>>
>> Didn't you got already comment for this patch? How did you implement it?
>>
>> Also, I asked you multiple times:
>>
>> Please use scripts/get_maintainers.pl to get a list of necessary people and lists
>> to CC. It might happen, that command when run on an older kernel, gives
>> you outdated entries. Therefore please be sure you base your patches on
>> recent Linux kernel.
>>
>> I don't understand why you ignore this.
>>
>> NAK, patch is not correct.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
>
> Thank you for your patient guidance.
> Because I'm not familiar with the review process and didn't use scripts/get_maintainers.pl properly in the initial email thread.
> Therefore, this series of errors was caused. Sorry for the confusion.
> Now I know how to use the script properly.
> After correcting the maintainer's suggestion, I'll restart a new email thread and review again.
Did you respond to feedback you got about the property? Did reviewer
agreed on your view after your feedback?
If not, then why resending this patch?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists