RE: [PATCH v8 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device tree bindings

[Swathi K S]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 06 March 2025 12:35
> To: Swathi K S <swathi.ks@xxxxxxxxxxx>; krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> andrew+netdev@xxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx;
> kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; robh@xxxxxxxxxx;
> conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx;
> mcoquelin.stm32@xxxxxxxxx; alexandre.torgue@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-stm32@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> pankaj.dubey@xxxxxxxxxxx; ravi.patel@xxxxxxxxxxx;
> gost.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device tree
> bindings
> 
> On 06/03/2025 04:40, Swathi K S wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: 05 March 2025 21:12
> >> To: Swathi K S <swathi.ks@xxxxxxxxxxx>; krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> >> andrew+netdev@xxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx;
> >> kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; robh@xxxxxxxxxx;
> >> conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx;
> >> mcoquelin.stm32@xxxxxxxxx; alexandre.torgue@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Cc: rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-stm32@st-md-
> mailman.stormreply.com;
> >> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> pankaj.dubey@xxxxxxxxxxx; ravi.patel@xxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> gost.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device
> >> tree bindings
> >>
> >> On 05/03/2025 10:12, Swathi K S wrote:
> >>> Add FSD Ethernet compatible in Synopsys dt-bindings document. Add
> >>> FSD Ethernet YAML schema to enable the DT validation.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Ravi Patel <ravi.patel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Swathi K S <swathi.ks@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> <form letter>
> >> This is a friendly reminder during the review process.
> >>
> >> It looks like you received a tag and forgot to add it.
> >>
> >> If you do not know the process, here is a short explanation:
> >> Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by/Tested-by tags when posting new
> >> versions of patchset, under or above your Signed-off-by tag, unless
> >> patch changed significantly (e.g. new properties added to the DT
> >> bindings). Tag is "received", when provided in a message replied to you
> on the mailing list.
> >> Tools like b4 can help here. However, there's no need to repost
> >> patches
> >> *only* to add the tags. The upstream maintainer will do that for tags
> >> received on the version they apply.
> >>
> >> Please read:
> >> https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=19972162-781c345b-1996aa2d-
> >> 000babffae10-7bd6b1a1d78b210b&q=1&e=94dcc3a6-5303-441a-8c1e-
> >> de696b216f86&u=https%3A%2F%2Felixir.bootlin.com%2Flinux%2Fv6.12-
> >> rc3%2Fsource%2FDocumentation%2Fprocess%2Fsubmitting-
> >> patches.rst%23L577
> >>
> >> If a tag was not added on purpose, please state why and what changed.
> >
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> > As per a review comment received from Russell, I had added 2 new
> properties to the DT - assigned-clocks and assigned-clock-parents properties.
> > The example in the DT binding reflects the same.
> > I felt it wouldn't be fair to add 'Reviewed-by' tag without you reviewing the
> updates again.
> > But I should have mentioned that in cover letter and apologies for missing
> to do that.
> Nothing in changelog explained new properties. Nothing mentioned

Had mentioned under 'changes since v7' in the cover letter patch where I had mentioned about addressing Russell's comment and corresponding DT binding example changes of setting clock tree in DT.

- Swathi 

> dropping tag, which you always must explicitly say.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof