Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: media: qcom,x1e80100-camss: Sort interconnect alphabetically

[Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@linaro.org>]

On 6/11/25 01:21, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 06:10:33PM +0300, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> On 6/10/25 18:02, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>>> On 10/06/2025 13:45, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> How is this a Fixes: ?
>>>>
>>>> I call it the fix to the dt-bindings documentation, then what is this
>>>> change, if it's not a fix?..
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, if there is a strong disagreement about if it's a fix or not,
>>>> the Fixes tag can be dropped from the change, since it's so secondary.
>>>
>>> Since we don't have a committed upstream user I don't think this is an
>>> ABI break.
>>
>> Well, Dmitry says it's an ABI break... It would be beneficial to come to
>> a common understanding here.
>>
>>> But I also don't think it warrants a Fixes: tag either, there's no bug.
>>
>> There is no bug, but there are Documentation/ changes with Fixes tags,
>> it's okay.
> 
> Fixes means that there was a bug / issue that needs to be fixed. For
> example, if there was a user for the bindings and the user had these

That's "for example" only, I don't think it's an all-descriptive definition.

 From Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:

   A Fixes: tag indicates that the patch fixes an issue in a previous commit.

In my opinion this is quite applicable here, the "fixed issue" in the device
tree binding documentation file is well set, and anyone can get it from
the provided commit message.

Anyway, per the ask I'll remove the Fixes: tag and resubmit these changes,
thank you for the patch review and discussion.

> values in a different order, then changing schema to follow established
> order would have been a fix.
> 
>>
>> I will resend the changes with whatever updates requested by both of you,
>> if they do not contradict to each other.
>>

--
Best wishes,
Vladimir