Re: [PATCH 8/8] dt: cpufreq: st: Provide bindings for ST's CPUFreq implementation

Lee Jones
2015-06-23T08:59:17Z

On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:

> Hello Lee and Viresh,
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> On 23-06-15, 08:06, Lee Jones wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Over that, this patch should have been present before any other
> >> > > patches using these bindings.
> >> >
> >> > I've never heard that one before, but it's easy to re-order the set.
> >>
> >> I don't know, but it seems obvious to me: Bindings first and then the
> >> code.
> >
> > Do you always write your documentation before implementing a
> > feature?
> >
> > Surely it goes;
> > Requirements Gathering
> > Plan and Prepare
> > Implement
> > Test
> > Document
> > Deliver
> >
> > ;)
> >
> > ... but as I say, I can re-order if required. It's really not a problem.
> >
>
> This is actually documented in
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt:
> ...
>
> 3) The Documentation/ portion of the patch should come in the series before
> the code implementing the binding.
>
> ....
>
> The rationale AFAIU is that it is easier to review the implementation
> of a binding after reading the DT binding doc since then you can see
> if the code matches what the DT binding describes.

Fair enough. Can't argue with that. :)

--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog