[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <561bbc1cf43c3795eee67e10537ba365@walle.cc>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2022 13:41:20 +0200
From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Manohar.Puri@...rochip.com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, kavyasree.kotagiri@...rochip.com,
krzk+dt@...nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: atmel,quadspi: Define lan966x QSPI
Am 2022-04-07 13:31, schrieb Mark Brown:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 01:23:45PM +0200, Michael Walle wrote:
>> The subject should also be prefixed with "dt-bindings: ".
>
> I tend to complain about people doing that.
After all it is mentioned to use that prefix in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst. I try to
remember when submitting SPI related bindings.
-michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists