Code Reviews related

Want to note down this thought so that I can think about it more later:

Problem:
- code review is usually done on a pull-request
- code-reviewer usually feels some pressure to not suggest trivial changes
- developer who wrote the code also feels pressure to not submit anything for code-review until he/she has reached a certain point
- note that the developer is getting too invested in his/her code by the time his/her code goes to code-review
- since the code-reviewer is aware of this, he/she might feel some pressure to mark the pull-request as 'code reviewed'

Possible Solution:
My thought is:
- developer submits a 1st pull-request that is explicitly marked as Temp Pull Request (and Do Not Merge label)
- this 1st pull-request is only for getting feedback (big and small changes)
- this 1st pull-request will not get merged even though it might be good
- developer has to create a second normal Pull Request which he/she is more confident of
- this second normal Pull Request will also have to code-reviewed and will be a candidate for getting merged

Advantages:
- less pressure on developer when giving the Temp Pull Request for review
- less pressure on code-reviewer while offering feedback for a Temp Pull Request
- Based on whether a reviewer is looking at a Temp Pull Request or a Normal Pull Request, he/she can be in the proper mindset to review the code
- The Normal Pull Request can include a link to the Temp Pull Request. Reviewer can see comments of the Temp Pull Request to get more context.