[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d45e31c4-914e-4cea-a145-9775b6f516ab@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:24:20 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>
Cc: robh@...nel.org, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
conor.culhane@...vaco.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev,
jirislaby@...nel.org, joe@...ches.com, linux-i3c@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, zbigniew.lukwinski@...ux.intel.com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] dt-bindings: i3c: svc: add compatible string i3c:
silvaco,i3c-target-v1
On 16/01/2024 03:29, Frank Li wrote:
>>> Patches were accepted after discussion, what you ponit to. So I
>>> think everyone agree on the name 'silvaco,i3c-master-v1'.
>>> I plan send next version to fix auto build error. Any additional
>>> comments about this?
>>
>> I still do not see how did you address Rob's comment and his point is
>> valid. You just did not reply to it.
>
> See https://lore.kernel.org/imx/ZXCiaKfMYYShoiXK@lizhi-Precision-Tower-5810/
First of all, that's not the answer to Rob's email, but some other
thread which is 99% ignored by Rob (unless he has filters for
"@Rob"...). Therefore no, it does not count as valid answer.
Second, explanation does not make sense. There is no argument granting
you exception from SoC specific compatibles.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists