Re: [PATCH] mailbox: Use of_property_read_bool() for boolean properties

[Jassi Brar]

On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 2:06 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 11:36 AM Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 11:25 AM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 08:47:10AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > > It is preferred to use typed property access functions (i.e.
> > > > of_property_read_<type> functions) rather than low-level
> > > > of_get_property/of_find_property functions for reading properties.
> > > > Convert reading boolean properties to to of_property_read_bool().
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/mailbox/hi6220-mailbox.c | 5 +----
> > > >  drivers/mailbox/omap-mailbox.c   | 3 +--
> > > >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Ping!
> > >
> > Pong :)
> >
> > I don't usually reply back that it looks good and will pick for the
> > merge window. I just do that. So yes, it is not overlooked.
>
> Okay. No reply nor applying it in over a month is not a great
> experience for submitters.
>
I sense that. I may be wrong, but I feel any form of ack from a
maintainer demotivates others from looking critically at the
submission. I have seen revisions asked after many weeks of
submission. So my idea is to let a patch roast in public glare.  Maybe
I should reply after 2-3weeks.

-j