linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] dt-bindings: net: Add QCA6698 Bluetooth

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <24ff0d8c-461e-470c-a9c7-5c0d5e5e7548@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2024 07:56:57 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: "Cheng Jiang (IOE)" <quic_chejiang@...cinc.com>,
 Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
 Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>, Rob Herring
 <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
 Balakrishna Godavarthi <quic_bgodavar@...cinc.com>,
 Rocky Liao <quic_rjliao@...cinc.com>
Cc: linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] dt-bindings: net: Add QCA6698 Bluetooth

On 29/11/2024 03:13, Cheng Jiang (IOE) wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On 11/28/2024 10:41 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 28/11/2024 15:41, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 28/11/2024 13:09, Cheng Jiang wrote:
>>>> Add the compatible for the Bluetooth part of the Qualcomm QCA6698 chipset.
>>>
>>> <form letter>
>>> This is a friendly reminder during the review process.
>>>
>>> It seems my or other reviewer's previous comments were not fully
>>> addressed. Maybe the feedback got lost between the quotes, maybe you
>>> just forgot to apply it. Please go back to the previous discussion and
>>> either implement all requested changes or keep discussing them.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>> </form letter>
>>>
>>> Respond to the comment and then implement it.
>>>
>>> Also, version your patches correct and provide changelog. This is v2,
>>> not v1.
>>
>> Wait, no, it's even v3 or v4. You just ask us to the same work twice,
>> don't you?
> Sorry for this. So the version number should be increased even 
> solution/implementation is changed? Will follow the rule.  

Yes, because you don't want to send the same for review over and over again.

Best regards,
Krzysztof