On 13/05/2024 16:17, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> dp.yaml >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ >>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) >>>> +%YAML 1.2 >>>> +--- >>>> +$id: >>> http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/mediatek/mediatek,phy-dp.yaml# >>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>>> + >>>> +title: MediaTek Display Port Controller >>>> + >>>> +maintainers: >>>> + - Mac shen <mac.s...@mediatek.com> >>>> + - Liankun yang <liankun.y...@mediatek.com> >>>> + >>>> +description: | >>>> + Special settings need to be configured by MediaTek DP based on >>> the actual >>>> + hardware situation. For example, when using a certain brand's >>> docking >>>> + station for display projection, garbage may appear. Adjusting >>> the specific >>>> + ssc value can resolve this issue. >>>> + >>>> +properties: >>>> + status: disabled >>> >>> I think you nicely shocked Rob already. >>> >>> Please reach internally to Mediatek or collaborating companies to get >>> basic training and instructions how to write patches and bindings. >>> >>> Otherwise it is waste of our time. Mediatek is not a small company so >>> there is no excuse in sending such poor quality patches, which would >>> be >>> EASILY spotted by the MOST BASIC review. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Krzysztof >>> >> >> I used scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported error and warnings. >> I am resumbmitting bindings by the MOST BASIC review. > > No, please wait. Who did the basic review of your patch? Who from > Mediatek? Upstream is not a workhorse to use instead of your resources > for the absolute basic stuff... This feels such exploiting. >
After reading AngeloGioacchino's response, it looks even worse... This was never tested... So not only exploiting but also feels like wasting our time. Best regards, Krzysztof
