>>> >>> Please implement previous feedback. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Krzysztof >>> >> >> Since I am making changes to the existing driver instead of creating a new >> one, >> I introduced a new patch series. As I mentioned in the cover letter, cm36686 >> is >> fully compatible with vcnl4040, so instead of creating a new binding, I >> create a >> fallback compatible for the device. I probably should have named this patch >> series something else. > > That's fine, but that's v3 of previous patches. Your work was to add > CM36686 support. How you do it, evolves, but patchset/work is one > continuous work. When you rework approach next time, you also start from > v1? And then you go back to previous solution of new driver it will jump > from v1 to v3? >
There has been a misunderstanding. I assumed that since I will no longer be developing that driver, this warrants a new patch series. I apologize for this. Here is the changelog since v2: - Remove the previous unnecessary proposed driver and bindings. - Add a fallback compatible for cm36686 of vcnl4040. - Add a new compatible for cm36672p. - Add channel info for cm36672p. - Remove redundant information in the dt-bindings commit message. Here is the link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/[email protected]/ I have received some feedback regarding the changes I made to the existing vcnl4000 driver. Shall I submit the implementation of it as a v3 to that series of patches?
