linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] drivers: input: keyboard: st-keyscan: add keyscan driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140310155824.GB29054@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Date:	Mon, 10 Mar 2014 08:58:24 -0700
From:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	Gabriel FERNANDEZ <gabriel.fernandez@...com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...inux.com,
	Giuseppe Condorelli <giuseppe.condorelli@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drivers: input: keyboard: st-keyscan: add keyscan
 driver

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 03:38:15PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > This patch adds ST Keyscan driver to use the keypad hw a subset
> > > > of ST boards provide. Specific board setup will be put in the
> > > > given dt.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Condorelli <giuseppe.condorelli@...com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez@...com>
> > > 
> > > Are you sure these are in the correct order?
> > > 
> > > What is the history of this commit?
> > > 
> > > > ---
> > > >  .../devicetree/bindings/input/st-keypad.txt        |  50 ++++
> > > 
> > > This should be submitted as a seperate patch.
> > 
> > Why do we have such requirement? To me it would make more sense to add
> > binding documentation in the same commit as the code that uses these
> > bindings.
> 
> I'm inclined to agree with you and that's actually how we used to do
> it, but a decision was made by the DT guys at one of the Kernel
> Summits to submit Documentation as a separate patch.

Do you have background for this decision? To me it is akin splitting
header file into a separate patch.

-- 
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/