Hi Detlev, Am Dienstag, 6. August 2024, 18:34:41 CEST schrieb Detlev Casanova: > On Sunday, 4 August 2024 05:56:39 EDT Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 02/08/2024 17:14, Detlev Casanova wrote: > > > From: Finley Xiao <finley.xiao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Define power domain IDs as described in the TRM. > > > > Please use subject prefixes matching the subsystem. You can get them for > > example with `git log --oneline -- DIRECTORY_OR_FILE` on the directory > > your patch is touching. For bindings, the preferred subjects are > > explained here: > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patche > > s.html#i-for-patch-submitters > > > Signed-off-by: Finley Xiao <finley.xiao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > [reword] > > > Signed-off-by: Detlev Casanova <detlev.casanova@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > > > include/dt-bindings/power/rk3576-power.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rk3576-power.h > > > > This is part of bindings. > > > > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rk3576-power.h > > > b/include/dt-bindings/power/rk3576-power.h > > Missing vendor prefix. This should be named after compatible. > > Looks like all other rockchip power bindings use the include/dt-bindings/ > power/rkXXXX.h format. Should I keep that way ? there is also rockchip,rv1126-power.h , so please follow Krzysztof's suggestion. Older header namings need to stay the same of course but that shouldn't keep us from updating naming schemes to better work in new additions.
