From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from onstation.org ([52.200.56.107]:47896 "EHLO onstation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752642AbcJZRi1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Oct 2016 13:38:27 -0400 Received: from localhost (c-98-236-77-125.hsd1.wv.comcast.net [98.236.77.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: masneyb) by onstation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F4A038D for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:38:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 13:38:25 -0400 From: Brian Masney To: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org Subject: Question about submitting patch set against staging/iio/light/tsl2583 Message-ID: <20161026173825.GA21767@basecamp.onstation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-iio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org Part of the tsl2583 driver cleanup that I am working on involves adding device tree support to that driver. Based on the isl29018 driver cleanups that I did, I now know that the device tree maintainers should be CCed for any device tree changes. What is the appropriate way to submit my patch set that spans two different subsystems? Should I submit my lone device tree patch to linux-iio and CC the device tree maintainers? Then submit the rest of my patch set to just the linux-iio maintainers? Or should I CC the device tree maintainers with my entire patch set? I'm leaning towards the separate approach to reduce the amount of noise to the device tree list. Brian