On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 6:48 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 02:09:21PM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 1:59 PM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 01:36:04PM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 1:12 PM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 05:19:29AM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Please submit patches using subject lines reflecting the style for the
> > > > > subsystem, this makes it easier for people to identify relevant patches.
> > >
> > > > Since this is a binding migration change I sent the patch expecting
> > > > this going into the devicetree kernel tree. So I just use the common
> > > > device tree change style 'dt-bindings: spi: migrate mt7621 text
> > > > bindings to YAML' as the subject. So I don't really understand what
> > > > you mean above, sorry. What is wrong with this subject? I submitted
> > > > this v3 [0] and I was told by Rob to resend it to you and the
> > > > linux-spi mail list also.
> > >
> > > Bindings mostly go through the subsystem rather than the DT tree.
> >
> > I thought when changes are only in the binding side DT tree was
> > preferred. Sorry for the inconvenience, then. Will take into account
> > your advice from now on.
>
> Sometimes they do, but that's more the exception. The ones from you I've
> picked up don't have a subsystem really or the subsystem maintainer
> isn't too active or doesn't pay much attention to DT only patches. Mark
> is responsive and pays some attention to binding patches, so he takes
> them.
Thanks a lot for clarification, Rob. Much appreciated.
Best regards,
Sergio Paracuellos
>
> Rob
