linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Input: silead - list all supported compatible strings in binding document

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]

Date:   Mon, 3 Apr 2017 16:15:30 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Robert Dolca <robert.dolca@...el.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        "linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: silead - list all supported compatible strings in
 binding document

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas
<javier@....samsung.com> 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 <javier@....samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>  .../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.

> 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". :)

Rob