Re: FW: [PATCH v2 2/3] ASoC: dt-bindings: irondevice,sma1307: Add initial DT binding

[Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 01:16:01AM +0000, Ki-Seok Jo wrote:
> > >
> > > I have no intention of opposing the content. I am asking again because I
> > didn't receive any warnings when I did the following, and I suspect I might
> > have done something wrong.
> > >
> > >
> > > ./scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/irondevice,sma1307.yaml
> > >
> > > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 54 lines checked
> > >
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/irondevice,sma1307.yaml has no
> > obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
> > >
> > > I was under the impression that this only applied to patched files as
> > described above. It turns out it can also be used with patch files. Thank you
> > for the useful information!
> > >
> > 
> > That's not how you run checkpatch. You run it on the patch. Please read
> > submitting-patches document. It explains everything.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I am in the process of carefully incorporating your feedback and making the necessary revisions.
> 
> May I kindly ask you a question, if it's not too much trouble?
> When running checkpatch, what would be the best way to address the following warning?
> 
> WARNING: Prefer a maximum 75 chars per line (possible unwrapped commit description?)
> #21:
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/irondevice,sma1307.yaml
> 
> In this case, would it be better for me to add a line break in the patch file, or should I leave it as is?

Normally I would say you can ignore this, and that checkpatch doesn't
usually complain about the actually git output in here - but I think
checkpatch "broke" because you did not provide any commit message body
at all, so it starting parsing the git output instead. You need to write
a body!

> WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?
> #65:
> new file mode 100644
> 
> If the warning is appearing because it's a new file, is it something that can be safely ignored, or should I make changes to the MAINTAINERS file?
> 
> Thank you for your feedback. I am learning a lot of new things!

Usually for bindings, which have maintainers listed in them, you can
skip adding a MAINTAINERS entry.

Cheers,
Conor.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature