On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 4:04 AM Neeraj Soni
[off-list ref] wrote:

Hi,

On 1/16/2026 10:24 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 14/01/2026 17:18, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 15:18:46 +0530, Neeraj Soni wrote:

quoted

Document Inline Crypto Engine (ICE) handle for SDHC and add its device-tree
node to enable it for kodiak.

How this patch was tested:
- export ARCH=arm64
- export CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-linux-gnu-
- make menuconfig
- make defconifg
- make DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/sdhci-msm.yaml dt_binding_check
- make ARCH=arm64 CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-linux-gnu- CHECK_DTBS=y dtbs

---
Changes in v2:
- Removed the "if: required:" description for "qcom,ice" dt-binding
  as the ICE node is optional.
- Corrected the ICE dt node entry according to the dt-binding description.
- Added test details.

Is this another report being ignored by the author? I'll start the list.

No i did not ignore this. I see this comment in the message:

"Ultimately, it is up to the platform maintainer whether these warnings are acceptable or not.
No need to reply unless the platform maintainer has comments."

This statement applies when the previous sentences in that paragraph
are true. Those say:

Some warnings may be from an existing SoC .dtsi. Or perhaps the warnings
are fixed by another series.

You are adding a new node here and there's warnings for that node.
Clearly these are not existing warnings and unlikely fixed by another
series.

Rob