[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <96d847bc-bab6-2d99-66f0-1ca93e0f62a8@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 21:52:38 +0530
From: Sameer Pujar <spujar@...dia.com>
To: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>, <broonie@...nel.org>,
<lgirdwood@...il.com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
<thierry.reding@...il.com>
CC: <jonathanh@...dia.com>, <stephan@...hold.net>,
<alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ASoC: Add json-schema documentation for
sound-name-prefix
On 9/2/2021 6:17 PM, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Thu 02 Sep 2021 at 11:23, Sameer Pujar <spujar@...dia.com> wrote:
>
>> The 'sound-name-prefix' is used to prepend suitable strings to a
>> component widgets or controls. This is helpful when there are
>> multiple instances of the same component. Add relevant json-schema
>> and is inspired from sound-name-prefix.txt documentation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sameer Pujar <spujar@...dia.com>
>> Cc: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
>> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
>> ---
>> .../devicetree/bindings/sound/name-prefix.yaml | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/name-prefix.yaml
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/name-prefix.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/name-prefix.yaml
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00000000..b58cc9e
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/name-prefix.yaml
>> @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>> +%YAML 1.2
>> +---
>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/sound/name-prefix.yaml#
>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>> +
>> +title: Component sound name prefix
>> +
>> +maintainers:
>> + - Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
> Since this file is referenced using "AllOf", am I going to be listed as
> maintainer of all the drivers using the property below ? I'm not sure I
> want that ... :P
>
> Maybe it would be better to drop the above ?
The 'maintainers' seems to be a mandatory field. To address above may be
drop the top level reference and refer the property directly via a
definition if the earlier method [in v1] was not appropriate?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists