Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] hwmon: (pmbus/vt7505) Add driver for Analog Devices MAX16545/MAX16550 and Volterra VT7505

From: Guenter Roeck

Date: Fri Jul 24 2026 - 13:53:47 EST


Hi,

On 7/24/26 09:50, Pradhan, Sanman wrote:
From: Georgi Vlaev <gvlaev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Add a PMBus driver for the Analog Devices MAX16545 and MAX16550, and the
Volterra VT7505 controllers. The driver reports input/output voltage,
input/output current, input power and temperature over PMBus. All values
use the direct data format. Peak input voltage, output voltage, output
current, input power and temperature readings are exposed and can be
reset.

The reported current and power depend on the external current-report
resistor connected to the ILOAD pin, which can be provided through the
"adi,rload-ohms" device tree property.

On the MAX16550 and VT7505, the severe-OCP deglitch time can optionally
be configured with the "adi,ocp-severe-filter-us" device tree property.
When omitted, the existing hardware setting is left unchanged.

Signed-off-by: Georgi Vlaev <gvlaev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Dhruva Devineni <ddevineni@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Dhruva Devineni <ddevineni@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Debjit Ghosh <dghosh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Debjit Ghosh <dghosh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: JawaharBalaji Thirumalaisamy <jawaharb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: JawaharBalaji Thirumalaisamy <jawaharb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Avadhut Naik <avadhutn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Avadhut Naik <avadhutn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Santhanakrishnan Balraj <sbalraj@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Santhanakrishnan Balraj <sbalraj@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Brian Mak <makb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Brian Mak <makb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sanman Pradhan <psanman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---

I get delivery errors for the following addresses.
ddevineni@xxxxxxxxxxx
gvlaev@xxxxxxxxxxx
avadhutn@xxxxxxxxxxx

meaning they are quite obviously _not_ involved in the patch approval path.
Please drop those addresses. Also, per Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:

Any further SoBs (Signed-off-by:'s) following the author's SoB are from
people handling and transporting the patch, but were not involved in its
development. SoB chains should reflect the **real** route a patch took
as it was propagated to the maintainers and ultimately to Linus, with
the first SoB entry signalling primary authorship of a single author.

Does the above SoB sequence really reflect the approval patch for this
patch ?

Thanks,
Guenter