On Mon, 2020-12-21 at 10:02 -0700, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 9:15 PM Liu Ying <victor.liu@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, 2020-12-18 at 16:42 -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 7:48 PM Liu Ying <victor.liu@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2020-12-17 at 12:50 -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 17:59:23 +0800, Liu Ying wrote: > > > > > > This patch adds bindings for i.MX8qm/qxp pixel combiner. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Liu Ying <victor.liu@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > .../display/bridge/fsl,imx8qxp-pixel-combiner.yaml | 160 > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > 1 file changed, 160 insertions(+) > > > > > > create mode 100644 > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,imx8qxp- > > > > > > pixel-combiner.yaml > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My bot found errors running 'make dt_binding_check' on your > > > > > patch: > > > > > > > > > > yamllint warnings/errors: > > > > > > > > > > dtschema/dtc warnings/errors: > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,imx8qxp- > > > > > pixel-combiner.example.dts:19:18: fatal error: dt- > > > > > bindings/clock/imx8-lpcg.h: No such file or directory > > > > > 19 | #include <dt-bindings/clock/imx8-lpcg.h> > > > > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > compilation terminated. > > > > > make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:342: > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,imx8qxp- > > > > > pixel-combiner.example.dt.yaml] Error 1 > > > > > make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... > > > > > make: *** [Makefile:1364: dt_binding_check] Error 2 > > > > > > > > > > See > > > > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.ozlabs.org%2Fpatch%2F1417599&data=04%7C01%7Cvictor.liu%40nxp.com%7C7cd8e43f582b48535f8f08d8a5d235eb%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637441669585674325%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=%2BWYPU1JU4sLsE8ULeoAKvaEUBqHQAPyuydkA50%2Ffjvs%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > This check can fail if there are any dependencies. The base for a > > > > > patch > > > > > series is generally the most recent rc1. > > > > > > > > This series can be applied to linux-next/master branch. > > > > > > I can't know that to apply and run checks automatically. I guessed > > > that reviewing this before sending, but I want it abundantly clear > > > what the result of applying this might be and it wasn't mentioned in > > > this patch. > > > > > > Plus linux-next is a base no one can apply patches to, so should you > > > be sending patches based on it? It's also the merge window, so maybe > > > > I sent this series based on drm-misc-next. This series is applicable > > to linux-next/master, and may pass 'make dt_binding_check' there. > > But to be clear, 'make dt_binding_check' would fail on drm-misc-next > until 5.11-rc1 is merged in. The drm-misc maintainers need to know > that. Ok, will mention the dependency. Thanks. > > > > I'll mention dependencies in the future where similar situations > > appear. Thanks. > > > > BTW, does it make sense for the bot to additionaly try linux-next if > > needed? Maybe, that'll be helpful? > > Sure, and when I've got nothing else to do maybe I'll do that. Though > maintainers still need to know what the dependencies are. The real > solution here is to make 'base-commit' tags more common or required so > that neither scripts/bots nor humans have to guess what the base is. Yeah, 'base-commit' is good, but a base commit should be 'well-known' as doc[1] indicates, otherwise, it is likely unfound. So, it seems that linux-next is worthy of a try. [1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch Regards, Liu Ying > > Rob
