Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-108145-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:19:32 +0100
From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>
To: "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>, 
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>, Chris Brandt <chris.brandt@renesas.com>, 
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, 
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>, 
	Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro.jz@renesas.com>, Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: i2c: renesas,riic: Update comment for
 fallback string
Message-ID: <eqtj4hpmdqhtftdtpvt7r7iwrkzga365p4ao5kuteovb2behxz@frmyzxemkfwm>
References: <20240308172726.225357-1-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
 <20240308172726.225357-2-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
 <aee88f81-0b8a-4f57-9dab-b4d13db47abe@linaro.org>
 <CA+V-a8s9OaZ7_RXGjkZYpNS7879ku-aXJ+AvsfgvuTZshyWd5A@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CA+V-a8s9OaZ7_RXGjkZYpNS7879ku-aXJ+AvsfgvuTZshyWd5A@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Prabhakar,

On Sat, Mar 09, 2024 at 11:05:40PM +0000, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 9, 2024 at 11:58 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > On 08/03/2024 18:27, Prabhakar wrote:
> > > With the fallback string being utilized by multiple other SoCs, this
> > > patch updates the comment for the generic compatible string.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro.jz@renesas.com>
> >
> > Really, you review a comment change? Internally?
> >
> > Is this some sort of company policy? Are these even true reviews?
> >
> Yes this patch was reviewed internally and it's "real". Unfortunately
> I cannot share the repo externally where this review was done but I
> can assure it was reviewed. As this is not a single patch all the
> patches in this series were internally reviewed. Is it bad to review a
> comment change?
> BTW what makes you think I have added fake review tags?

I don't believe Krzysztof is questioning the validity of your
offline reviews, but the community is unaware of what happens
in your closed environment.

If you submit a patch with the r-b tag, it holds little
significance for me since I haven't witnessed the review process
myself. However, you are, of course, free to include it; I have
no objections to that.

My suggestion is for Fabrizio to publicly express his review on
this mailing list, which would add more value to the time he
spent reviewing your patch.

By the way, there are other companies that do this.

Andi