> -----Original Message----- > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: 2023年5月31日 17:12 > To: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf@xxxxxxxxxx>; Joy Zou > <joy.zou@xxxxxxx>; Jacky Bai <ping.bai@xxxxxxx>; lgirdwood@xxxxxxxxx; > broonie@xxxxxxxxxx; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; > conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx; s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; festevam@xxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-imx > <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] dt-bindings: regulator: pca9450: add > pca9451a support > > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or > opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report > this email' button > > > On 31/05/2023 09:22, Frieder Schrempf wrote: > > On 31.05.23 08:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 31/05/2023 08:57, Joy Zou wrote: > >>> Update pca9450 bindings. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Joy Zou <joy.zou@xxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >> > >> Subject prefix is: regulator: dt-bindings: pca9450: > > > > Is there some way to have this consistent for all subsystems? Most > > subsystems seem to use: > > > > dt-bindings: [subsystem]: > > > > But some use: > > > > [subsystem]: dt-bindings: > > > > Casual contributors (like me) will very often get it wrong on the > > first try. Examining the history is extra effort that could be avoided > > and often doesn't provide a definite hint as you find both variations > > in the past. > > > > Can we standardize this and make checkpatch validate the subject line? > > I understand your pain. :) > > My expectation is just to have "dt-bindings:" prefix. It can be anywhere > - first or second, doesn't matter to me. > > Then there is the generic rule that subsystem prefix should be the first and > here there is a disagreement between some folks. Most maintainers either > don't care or assume bindings are separate subsystem. Mark (spi, ASoC, > regulator) and media-folks say it is not separate subsystem (real subsystem are > spi, regulator etc), thus they want their subsystem name as the first prefix. It > sounds reasonable. Anyway it does not contradict DT bindings maintainers > expectation to have somewhere "dt-bindings:" prefix. > > My comment was only to help you and there is no need to resend. I think > Mark when applying will drop "dt-bindings" prefix if is before regulator, though. > Life, no big deal. Ok, thank you very much for the explanation! I better adjust the prefix. BR Joy Zou > > Whether checkpatch can do this? Sure, quite likely, one just need some > Perl-foo to add such rule. :) > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
