Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/5] wifi: ath12k: Add wifi device node with WSI for QCN9274 in RDP433

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 07/11/2024 12:06, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 11:23:20AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 05/11/2024 19:04, Raj Kumar Bhagat wrote:
>>> The RDP433 is a Qualcomm Reference Design Platform based on the
>>> IPQ9574. It features three QCN9274 WiFi devices connected to PCIe1,
>>> PCIe2, and PCIe3. These devices are also interconnected via a WLAN
>>> Serial Interface (WSI) connection. This WSI connection is essential
>>> for exchanging control information among these devices.
>>>
>>> This patch series describes the WSI interface found in QCN9274 in
>>> device tree and uses this device tree node in the Ath12k driver to get the
>>> details of WSI connection for Multi Link Operation (MLO) among multiple
>>> QCN9274 devices.
>>>
>>> NOTES:
>>> 1. As ath12k MLO patches are not ready yet, this patchset does not apply
>>>    to the ath.git ath-next branch and that's why the patchset is marked
>>>    as RFC. These are the work-in-progress patches we have at the moment.
>>>    The full set of MLO patches is available at:
>>>    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ath/ath.git/log/?h=ath12k-mlo-qcn9274
>>>
>>> 2. The dependency marked below applies only to the DTS patch. The
>>>    dt-bindings patches do not have this dependency.
>>>
>>> Depends-On: [PATCH V7 0/4] Add PCIe support for IPQ9574
>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20240801054803.3015572-1-quic_srichara@xxxxxxxxxxx/
>>>
>>> v3:
>>> - Created a separate binding "qcom,ath12k-wsi.yaml" to describe ath12k PCI
>>>   devices with WSI interface.
>>
>> Thanks for the changes. When you finish with testing/RFC, please send
>> proper version for review (just remember to keep numbering, next one is
>> v4 regardless whether this is RFC or not).
> 
> Isn't the 'RFC' being an invitation for review per the nature of the tag
> itself?

No, RFC means patch is not ready, might change. This was brought on the
lists multiple times and some maintainers clearly ignore RFC. Including me.

> 

Best regards,
Krzysztof