On 11 July 2014 02:35, Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Introduce common framework for client/protocol drivers and > controller drivers of Inter-Processor-Communication (IPC). > > Client driver developers should have a look at > include/linux/mailbox_client.h to understand the part of > the API exposed to client drivers. > Similarly controller driver developers should have a look > at include/linux/mailbox_controller.h > > Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/mailbox.txt | 33 ++ > Documentation/mailbox.txt | 107 +++++ > MAINTAINERS | 8 + > drivers/mailbox/Makefile | 4 + > drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c | 490 +++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/mailbox_client.h | 48 ++ > include/linux/mailbox_controller.h | 128 ++++++ > 7 files changed, 818 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/mailbox.txt > create mode 100644 Documentation/mailbox.txt > create mode 100644 drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c > create mode 100644 include/linux/mailbox_client.h > create mode 100644 include/linux/mailbox_controller.h I don't think combining code and documentation like this is the right approach. As per Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt: "1) The Documentation/ portion of the patch should be a separate patch." I am not sure if binding document and regular documentation should be separated out or if they can stay together (those more knowledgeable, please comment!), but the code portion should definitely be a separate patch from the documentation. Regards, -Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
