Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] regulator: pca9450: make warm reset on PMIC_RST_B assertion

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 11/04/2024 12:01, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> The default configuration of the PMIC behavior makes the PMIC
> power cycle most regulators on PMIC_RST_B assertion. This power
> cycling causes the memory contents of OCRAM to be lost.
> Some systems needs some memory that survives reset and
> reboot, therefore this patch is created.
> 
> This patch extends commit 2364a64d0673 ("regulator: pca9450:
> Make warm reset on WDOG_B assertion") to the other reset
> input source PMIC_RST_B as per pmic specs.
> 
> CC: Matteo Lisi <matteo.lisi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Mirko Ardinghi <mirko.ardinghi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Aiuto <fabio.aiuto@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  .../bindings/regulator/nxp,pca9450-regulator.yaml     |  6 ++++++

Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Then please
run `scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict` and (probably) fix more warnings.
Some warnings can be ignored, especially from --strict run, but the code
here looks like it needs a fix. Feel free to get in touch if the warning
is not clear.

>  drivers/regulator/pca9450-regulator.c                 | 11 ++++++++---
>  include/linux/regulator/pca9450.h                     |  6 ++++++
>  3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 

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kernel, gives you outdated entries.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.

Tools like b4 or scripts/get_maintainer.pl provide you proper list of
people, so fix your workflow. Tools might also fail if you work on some
ancient tree (don't, instead use mainline), work on fork of kernel
(don't, instead use mainline) or you ignore some maintainers (really
don't). Just use b4 and everything should be fine, although remember
about `b4 prep --auto-to-cc` if you added new patches to the patchset.

You missed at least devicetree list (maybe more), so this won't be
tested by automated tooling. Performing review on untested code might be
a waste of time, thus I will skip this patch entirely till you follow
the process allowing the patch to be tested.

Please kindly resend and include all necessary To/Cc entries.



Also: underscores are not allowed in property names.

Best regards,
Krzysztof