Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,ipq8074-qmp-pcie: add ipq9574 gen3x2 PHY

[mr . nuke . me]

On 4/10/24 02:02, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 10/04/2024 08:59, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 09/04/2024 22:19, mr.nuke.me@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > >    
> > > > >      clock-names:
> > > > >        items:
> > > > >          - const: aux
> > > > >          - const: cfg_ahb
> > > > >          - const: pipe
> > > > > +      - const: anoc
> > > > > +      - const: snoc
> > > >
> > > > OK, you did not test it. Neither this, nor DTS. I stop review, please
> > > > test first.
> > >
> > > I ran both `checkpatch.pl` and `make dt_binding_check`. What in this
> > > patch makes you say I "did not test it", and what test or tests did I miss?
> >
> > ... and no, you did not. If you tested, you would easily see error:
> > 	clock-names: ['aux', 'cfg_ahb', 'pipe'] is too short
> >
> > When you receive comment from reviewer, please investigate thoroughly
> > what could get wrong. Don't answer just to get rid of reviewer. It's
> > fine to make mistakes, but if reviewer points to issue and you
> > immediately respond "no issue", that's waste of my time.
>
> To clarify: "no issue" response is waste of my time. If you responded
> "oh, I see the error, but I don't know how to fix it", it would be ok, I
> can clarify and help in this.

I apologize if I gave you this impression. I tried to follow the testing 
process, it did not turn out as expected. Obviously, I missed something. 
I tried to ask what I missed, and in order for that question to make 
sense, I need to describe what I tried.

It turns out what I missed was "make check_dtbs". I only found that out 
after an automated email from Rob describing some troubleshooting steps.

If I may have a few sentences to rant, I see the dt-schema as a hurdle 
to making an otherwise useful change. I am told I can ask for help when 
I get stuck, yet I manage to insult the maintainer by aking for help. I 
find this very intimidating.

Alex