On 12/07/2025 12:40, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:

Hi Krzysztof,

On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 09:48:49AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:40:30PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote:

quoted

Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older
Ralink/Mediatek devices.

Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <redacted>
---
 .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml  | 47 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml

Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something
here...

hrm? that makes no sense. Various drivers have multiple compatible lines.

Luckily we do not speak about drivers here. Anyway, follow standard
review practices, you don't get special rules.

Could you please elaborate what you mean ?

Rosen replied in abrasive way, so I am not going to dig this.

I greped through Documentation/devicetree/bindings/*/*.yaml and plenty

I assume you refer to last 2 years bindings, not something older, right?
It is really poor argument to find old files and use them as example
"they did like that".

of "compatible:" items do not match the filename. So hard to tell

I did not ask for compatible to match filename.

what rule you are referencing, as it seems it's not really applied.

Check reviews on the lists. It is pretty standard review. Everyone gets
it for this case here - single device, single compatible.

Best regards,
Krzysztof