>> How good does such a change combination fit to the patch requirement >> according to separation of concerns? >> https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.14-rc6#n81 > > It is a general refactor patch, it shouldn't change any functionality. I could split it to one part introducing `devm_clk_get_enabled()` and the other `dmaenginem_async_device_register()`, but I don't feel that to be necessary, nor does it bring any advantages I believe. Can it matter a bit more to separate changes for the application of devm functions and the adjustment of corresponding exception handling with dev_err_probe() calls? Regards, Markus
