From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Javier Martinez Canillas Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: silead - list all supported compatible strings in binding document Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 17:23:01 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20170329182531.17349-1-javier@osg.samsung.com> <20170403152543.im7tbkhfc3lj7lyt@rob-hp-laptop> <6574d158-7fe8-7a2f-dab6-1c155780c785@osg.samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ec2-52-27-115-49.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com ([52.27.115.49]:60288 "EHLO osg.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751843AbdDCVXO (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 17:23:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Rob Herring Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Robert Dolca , Hans de Goede , Dmitry Torokhov , "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" , Mark Rutland Hello Rob, On 04/03/2017 05:15 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas > wrote: >> Hello Rob, >> >> On 04/03/2017 11:25 AM, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:25:31PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>>> The driver contains compatible strings for different models, but the DT >>>> binding doc only lists one of them. Add the remaining to the document. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas >>>> --- >>>> >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt | 7 ++++++- >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> "dt-bindings: input: ..." is preferred for the subject, but no need to >>> respin just for that. >>> >> >> Can we document it in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt? > > Yes. Actually, I was thinking of adding the preferred prefixes to > MAINTAINERS. Then checkpatch.pl could check it perhaps. > That would be great. >> I'm asking because is true that at the beginning we used "dt-bindings: foo" for >> all DT bindings patches but then many (most?) maintainers started asking for the >> subsystem subject line to be used for both drivers and DT bindings docs since >> they would be merging both and also they could miss the DT bindings patches if >> their subsystem prefix was not used. > > I'd argue that most subsys maintainers don't (or they just change it > when applying). Mark B does the most. I'm not going to waste any time > arguing over it if folks want something different. I'm mainly trying > to get rid of subjects like "Documentation: devicetree: bindings: > Document the DT binding for foo-bar". :) > Yeah, I don't have a strong opinion. I just want an authoritative doc so I can refer subsystems maintainers to when they argue that I should use their subsystem prefix instead of "dt-bindings: foo: ..." :) > Rob > Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Open Source Group Samsung Research America