[PATCHv3 wireless-next 7/7] dt-bindings: net: wireless: rt2800: add

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 12/07/2025 12:40, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 09:48:49AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:40:30PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote:
>>>>> Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older
>>>>> Ralink/Mediatek devices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp at gmail.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  .../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