On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 03:44:37PM +0200, Erikas Bitovtas wrote: > On 2/11/26 3:37 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 03:32:41PM +0200, Erikas Bitovtas wrote:
... > >>>>> Please implement previous feedback. > >>>> > >>>> Since I am making changes to the existing driver instead of creating a > >>>> new one, > >>>> I introduced a new patch series. As I mentioned in the cover letter, > >>>> cm36686 is > >>>> fully compatible with vcnl4040, so instead of creating a new binding, I > >>>> create a > >>>> fallback compatible for the device. I probably should have named this > >>>> patch > >>>> series something else. > >>> > >>> That's fine, but that's v3 of previous patches. Your work was to add > >>> CM36686 support. How you do it, evolves, but patchset/work is one > >>> continuous work. When you rework approach next time, you also start from > >>> v1? And then you go back to previous solution of new driver it will jump > >>> from v1 to v3? > >>> > >> > >> There has been a misunderstanding. I assumed that since I will no longer > >> be developing that driver, this warrants a new patch series. I apologize > >> for this. > >> Here is the changelog since v2: > >> - Remove the previous unnecessary proposed driver and bindings. > >> - Add a fallback compatible for cm36686 of vcnl4040. > >> - Add a new compatible for cm36672p. > >> - Add channel info for cm36672p. > >> - Remove redundant information in the dt-bindings commit message. > >> Here is the link to v2: > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/[email protected]/ > >> > >> I have received some feedback regarding the changes I made to the > >> existing vcnl4000 driver. Shall I submit the implementation of it as a > >> v3 to that series of patches? > > > > I guess v4 would be better as this is assumed misversioned v3, if I got > > the situation correctly. > > Yes, I started a new patch series when I should have continued previous > one. I will submit an implementation of your feedback as a v4 to the > patch series I started initially. Thank you! Do not forget to include the _full_ changelog per version ...from v<N>: ... ...from v2: ... ...from v1: ... -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
