[PATCH] checkpatch: Update DT bindings should be a separate patch text

[PATCH] checkpatch: Update DT bindings should be a separate patch text

[Marek Vasut]

The current message can be slightly misleading, because it triggers
on a patchset which contains the following sequence of patches, even
if the bindings and headers are clearly a separate patch:

0001 ... patch which contains the DT .yaml bindings
000m ... unrelated patches
000n ... patch which contains DT headers <--- this emits the warning

The intention of this message is to indicate, that the bindings and
headers must be in the same 0001 patch, and the headers must not be
in the separate 000n patch. The patchset must be structured as follows:

0001 ... patch which contains the DT .yaml bindings + DT headers
000m ... unrelated patches
000n ... unrelated patches

Reword the warning for improved clarity.

Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org>
---
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
Cc: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org
---
NOTE: This comes from discussion with Krzysztof at
      https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/d246edd2-5f9d-4e95-850d-abff175088a6@kernel.org/
---
 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 3727156e4ccad..e505ba0666bdc 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -2957,7 +2957,7 @@ sub process {
 				if (($last_binding_patch != -1) &&
 				    ($last_binding_patch ^ $is_binding_patch)) {
 					WARN("DT_SPLIT_BINDING_PATCH",
-					     "DT binding docs and includes should be a separate patch. See: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst\n");
+					     "DT binding docs and includes should be a single patch, but separate from this patch. See: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst\n");
 				}
 			}
 
-- 
2.53.0

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Update DT bindings should be a separate patch text

[Joe Perches]

On Sat, 2026-05-02 at 21:10 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> The current message can be slightly misleading, because it triggers
> on a patchset which contains the following sequence of patches, even
> if the bindings and headers are clearly a separate patch:

I agree with Krzysztof, I don't find the existing text unclear.

If you really think something needs to be more verbose, add --verbose
to the checkpatch command line and update the documentation file

Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Update DT bindings should be a separate patch text

[Marek Vasut]

On 5/2/26 10:03 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2026-05-02 at 21:10 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> The current message can be slightly misleading, because it triggers
>> on a patchset which contains the following sequence of patches, even
>> if the bindings and headers are clearly a separate patch:
> 
> I agree with Krzysztof, I don't find the existing text unclear.
I guess it is just me who was confused my the output then.