Re: [PATCH v4 01/20] dt-bindings: phy: Add starfive,jh7110-inno-hdmi-phy

On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 08:34:18PM -0400, Joshua Peisach wrote:

On Thu Sep 17, 2026 at 2:51 AM EDT, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Sep 15, 2026 at 05:32:09PM +0200, Michal Wilczynski wrote:

quoted

Add the dt-binding for the StarFive JH7110 Innosilicon HDMI PHY.

This device is a child of the starfive,jh7110-hdmi-subsystem node. It
functions as both a PHY provider for the controller and as a clock
provider for the variable pixel clock (hdmi_pclk), which it generates
from its refoclk.

Reviewed-by: Joshua Peisach <redacted>

While I appreciate other people looking at this, I don't think review
here applies. It was a blanket tag, given to the entire series, with
exception that it is from newbie, thus I want to ask: was this binding
REALLY reviewed by Joshua?

Are the rest of the patches actually reviewed or just "looks good to
me"? I see no comments from Joshua on v3, v2 and v1, which is usual sign
of doing review.

I commented on v3 saying that I would test if I could. I don't just

Testing has nothing to do with reviewing.

throw "Reviewed-by" on everything I look at.

If anything, I've been trying to be more honest in reviews, and only
review ones that I actually care about[1].

You gave blanket tag for entire series, so I do not get this argument.

If reviewing patches isn't a good way for newbies to start getting
familiar with the kernel code (especially a NEW driver), then I don't
know what is.

Writing code and receiving review is something for newbies to start
with. If you do not know kernel code or bindings, why do you think
your review is applicable? If I try to review design of a post-tension
concrete bridge, I would probably learn something. Would my
review apply? No.

Best regards,
Krzysztof