Re: [RFC 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: imu: Add DT binding doc for BMI323

[Jagath Jog J]

Hi Jonathan

On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 7:01 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2023 22:14:40 +0530
> Jagath Jog J <jagathjog1996@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 5:55 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 18/09/2023 10:03, Jagath Jog J wrote:
> > > > Add devicetree description document for Bosch BMI323, a 6-Axis IMU.
> > >
> > > I don't know why this is RFC and cover letter does not explain it. Shall
> > > I just ignore it? Patch is no ready? Recently at least two times someone
> > > was disappointed that his code marked as RFC received my review.
> >
> > Thank you for reviewing. This was the sensor's first patch series,
> > so I initially submitted it as an RFC. I will mark it as "Patch"
> > in the next series.
>
> Have more confidence!  RFCs need to have clearly stated questions.
> If you don't have any then you are putting forwards driver for review
> in ordering to get it merged upstream - so PATCH is appropriate.
> As you'll see many IIO drivers go through a 'few' revisions once they
> are posted (hopefully not too many!)
>
> Krzysztof is great at reviewing whatever shows up, but in many
> cases reviewers won't look at an RFC (unless a big discussion starts) because
> they aren't interested in open questions, just code that the author considers
> ready.

Thank you for your feedback and guidance. I appreciate
the insight into the RFC process and the importance of
clearly stated questions. I'll keep this in mind when
preparing future submissions.

Regards
Jagath

>
> Jonathan