[PATCH v9 03/23] dt-bindings: ufs: mediatek,ufs: Add mt8196 variant

[Rob Herring]

On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 5:04 AM Nicolas Frattaroli
<nicolas.frattaroli at collabora.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, 7 March 2026 19:01:17 Central European Standard Time Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >
> > Nicolas,
> >
> > >> "ufs" is redundant as all the clocks are for UFS. Same comment on prior
> > >> patch.
> > >
> > > Is this naming a big enough concern to block this series with two
> > > explicit acks on this patch that fixes a wholly broken and useless
> > > binding?
> >
> > It is if it comes from one of the DT maintainers.
> >
> > > I am trying to put out this dumpster fire of a downstream turd that
> > > made its way into mainline as the review process has been completely
> > > subverted, and is only getting worse with each passing month
> >
> > This has to stop. Please read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst.

I have little doubt that that is an accurate description of
downstream. And if properties are getting added without bindings, then
that is certainly a problem that should be complained about.

> >
> >
>
> I apologise for my tone, it's my frustration getting the better of me.
>
> I'll be handing off this series to someone else, so you won't have to
> deal with me anymore.
>
> I do ask however that you don't apply patches from MediaTek blindly;
> if there's code to read an OF property, and that OF property is not
> in the binding, then the patch should be rejected, even if there's an
> Ack from the MediaTek maintainer.

There's functionality to find undocumented compatibles in kernel code
(make dt_compatible_check), but not properties. Sounds like I need to
add that.

Rob