[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230412-dwindling-tattoo-220650300f1f@wendy>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 07:27:03 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To: Walker Chen <walker.chen@...rfivetech.com>
CC: Changhuang Liang <changhuang.liang@...rfivetech.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@...il.dk>,
Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/7] soc: starfive: Use call back to parse device tree
resources
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 02:07:52PM +0800, Walker Chen wrote:
>
>
> On 2023/4/11 14:47, Changhuang Liang wrote:
> > Different compatible parse device tree resources work in different ways.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Changhuang Liang <changhuang.liang@...rfivetech.com>
>
> I don't think it's necessary to submit multiple patches separately for the same .c file
> unless it is very necessary. Because the disadvantage of separating multiple patches
> is that some information lacks completeness and coherence.
Other than patches 4 & 6, which could be squashed, the breakdown here is
fine IMO. Doing one thing per patch makes it obvious to the reader
*what* is happening.
There's just some missing boilerplate in the commit messages across the
series that the DPHY PMU does not have a reg nor interrupts, and this
work is being done to support that.
Cheers,
Conor.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists