On 08/01/2024 00:02, David Lechner wrote: > On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 3:27 PM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jan 07, 2024 at 04:43:56PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >>> David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>> This adds a new spi-rx-bus-channels property to the generic spi >>>> peripheral property bindings. This property is used to describe >>>> devices that have parallel data output channels. >> >>>> This property is different from spi-rx-bus-width in that the latter >>>> means that we are reading multiple bits of a single word at one time >>>> while the former means that we are reading single bits of multiple words >>>> at the same time. >> >>> Mark, could you take a look at this SPI binding change when you have time? >> >> Please submit patches using subject lines reflecting the style for the >> subsystem, this makes it easier for people to identify relevant patches. >> Look at what existing commits in the area you're changing are doing and >> make sure your subject lines visually resemble what they're doing. >> There's no need to resubmit to fix this alone. > > Are you saying that `spi: dt-bindings:` should be preferred over > `dt-bindings: spi:`? > > I thought I was doing it right since I was following the guidelines of > [1] which says: > >> The preferred subject prefix for binding patches is: >> "dt-bindings: <binding dir>: ..." > > [1]: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html//v6.7/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.html There are exceptions. I documented them now: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20240108083750.16350-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#u Best regards, Krzysztof
