netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] dt-bindings: net: xilinx: document xilinx emaclite driver binding

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 16 Jun 2022 11:46:42 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        "Pandey, Radhey Shyam" <radhey.shyam.pandey@....com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org" 
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        "Katakam, Harini" <harini.katakam@....com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "git (AMD-Xilinx)" <git@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] dt-bindings: net: xilinx: document xilinx
 emaclite driver binding

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 7:54 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 15:48:43 -0700 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > I have seen a mixed set of the convention for dts patches. They are following
> > > both routes i.e device tree or subsystem repos provided acked from device
> > > tree maintainer.  If there is preference for device tree repo then I can drop
> > > net-next from subject prefix and resend it for the dt repo.
> >
> > If you got Ack from Devicetree bindings maintainer (Rob Herring or me),
> > then feel free to take it via net-next. I think, it is actually
> > preferred, unless this is some fix which needs to go via DT (Rob's) tree.
> >
> > If you don't have these acks, then better don't take it :) unless it's
> > really waiting too long on the lists. I hope it's not that case.
>
> GTK, thanks. I'm also often confused by the correct tree for DT patches.

It is documented in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst, section II.

The default is bindings should go thru subsystem trees. Given netdev's
tendency to apply bindings before DT review and even semi-automated
checks, but skipping standalone patches, I haven't minded picking them
up.

Rob