Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] dt-bindings: PCI: renesas,pci-rcar-gen2: 'depends-on' is no more optional

Herve Codina
2022-12-13T13:23:11Z

Hi Krzysztof,

On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 09:06:55 +0100
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 08/12/2022 16:51, Herve Codina wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 10:46:32 +0100
> > Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/12/2022 10:05, Herve Codina wrote:
> >>> Hi Krzysztof,
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 09:26:41 +0100
> >>> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 07/12/2022 17:24, Herve Codina wrote:
> >>>>> The 'depends-on' property is set in involved DTS.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Move it to a required property.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/renesas,pci-rcar-gen2.yaml | 1 +
> >>>>
> >>>> This should be squashed with previous patch. There is no point to add
> >>>> property and immediately in the next patch make it required. Remember
> >>>> that bindings are separate from DTS.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> Krzysztof
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I though about make dtbs_check in case of git bisect.
> >>
> >> And what would this commit change? In Git you will have
> >> 1. dt-bindings: PCI: renesas,pci-rcar-gen2: Add depends-on for RZ/N1 SoC
> >> family
> >> 2. dt-bindings: PCI: renesas,pci-rcar-gen2: 'depends-on' is no more optional
> >>
> >> so what is the difference for git bisect?
> >
> > Well, today, I have:
> > 1. dt-bindings: Add depends-on
> > 2. dts: Add depends-on
> > 3. dt-bindings: Move depends-on to mandatory
>
> What does it mean "I have"? Patches on mailing list? But we talk about
> Git and I wrote you bindings are DTS are not going the same tree.
>
> >
> > If I squash dt-bindings commits, I am going to have:
> > 1. dt-bindings: Add mandatory depends-on
> > 2. dts: Add depends-on
> > or
> > 1. dts: Add depends-on
> > 2. dt-bindings: Add mandatory depends-on
>
> And how does it matter? Anyway it goes separate trees.

I finally understand what you mean by separate trees.
And indeed, you're right, my patches split does not make
any sense.

According to feedbacks on this v3 series, these 3 patches
will be removed in v4.

Thanks for the review,
Hervé

--
Hervé Codina, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering