[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190827195606.GA28879@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:56:06 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Ashish Kumar <ashish.kumar@....com>,
"shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Kuldeep Singh <kuldeep.singh@....com>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [Patch v4 1/3] dt-bindings: spi: spi-fsl-qspi: Add
ls2080a compatibility string to bindings
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:50:05AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 07:49:27PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Drop the dt-bindings:.
> If you do 'git log --oneline Documentation/devicetree/bindings/' you'll
> notice that SPI and ASoC are the oddballs now. I don't really care
> except it does add to tribal knowledge needed regarding maintainers'
> requirements.
Well, you have been pushing people to change over to using
dt-bindings: so I guess you do care :( It really does cause me
to miss stuff, especially where people don't even include the
subsystem name in the header. I get quite a lot of CCs for
things where I once reviewed a patch for a subsystem that made
use of some subsystem I do maintain or where one patch in a
series (perhaps even an already applied one) was relevant at some
point so I'm doing quite a bit of triage that's purely based on
the subject lines.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists