Re: [GIT PULL 3/4] Renesas DT binding updates for v7.1

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 17/03/2026 10:29, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 
>>
>>> See also submitting patches in DT dir.
>>
>> So the second commit is subject to II.3:
>>
>>   3) For a series going through multiple trees, the binding patch should be
>>      kept with the driver using the binding.
>>
>> In this particular case, I could have included it in my drivers branch.
>> Where do I put SoC-specific DT binding changes that are not picked
>> up by anyone else (I don't have any this time)?
> 
> What is "SoC-specific"? You put the DT binding with the user, that was
> always the rule and that is implied by submitting patches. If you do not
> have any user, why would you pick that up?

Actually I want to correct myself or explain more. If you document ABI
for existing driver with DTS user of the ABI, but without driver change,
e.g. new front compatible when using already documented fallback, I
would keep the change in the driver branch, even  though technically the
DTS is the user of new compatible. That is what I was always doing at least.

Why? Because I expect there might be a next patchset with binding+driver
adding new fallback to the same binding, which would have to go via
driver branch because of mentioned submitting patches rule. Therefore if
I put that first binding in DTS branch and in the future I want to put
next change in the driver branch I would have unnecessary conflicts.


Best regards,
Krzysztof