Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <b4b56478-ac36-7fad-f771-8d545c022f57@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2023 11:35:33 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] arm64: dts: stratix10: add new compatible for Intel
 SoCFPGA Stratix10 platform
Content-Language: en-US
To:     "Li, Meng" <Meng.Li@windriver.com>,
        "dinguyen@kernel.org" <dinguyen@kernel.org>,
        "robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org" 
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        "conor+dt@kernel.org" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20230721083821.1820881-1-Meng.Li@windriver.com>
 <b8333812-df9d-368a-939b-3495878a2e5e@linaro.org>
 <884ed5d5-8863-ac76-5f00-4ed58480e9ab@linaro.org>
 <PH0PR11MB5191F52F01EF337A5965F848F13FA@PH0PR11MB5191.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <2dac9cb5-2582-2e5d-689d-49ced2dbde5b@linaro.org>
 <PH0PR11MB51918208B7FE0413548F2DE5F13FA@PH0PR11MB5191.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <846fad90-04b1-53e7-0f9d-1c243bbc6e92@linaro.org>
 <PH0PR11MB5191D789F87D7C9546F192D0F13FA@PH0PR11MB5191.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR11MB5191D789F87D7C9546F192D0F13FA@PH0PR11MB5191.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 21/07/2023 11:29, Li, Meng wrote:
>>>>>> NAK, don't fake reviews. This very impolite and destroys entire trust.
>>>>>> The model of upstream collaboration depends on the trust, which is
>>>>>> now gone for Windriver.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No! I don't fake a tag.
>>>>
>>>> Really? Then I ask second time - from where did you get it? Provide a link.
>>>>
>>>
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230718030851.2014306-1-Meng.Li@windrive
>>> r.com/T/
>>
>> So where is it? You pointed to your email. Where is the tag?
>>
> 
> Sorry! Maybe I have wrong understanding about TAG.
> From my perspective, If reviewers ask question or give some advices to the patch, I need to add the tag to v2.

This is some crazy idea. So you want to sprinkle some tags, just because
someone disagrees with your patch and explicitly gives you a NAK, which
means NOT-Ack, Not-acknowledge, not accepted, not in good shape.

I actually wonder why adding an acknowledging tag for the patch, if I
disagreed and gave you NAK. Following your logic, this should be a NAK
tag. This I could understand. But giving acknowledge when I clearly said
patch is wrong?

Read all process documents before submitting new patches:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/

> If it is not allowed, I apologize for that.

Best regards,
Krzysztof