On 10/01/2024 16:54, Ninad Palsule wrote: > Hello Krzysztof, > > > On 1/10/24 09:37, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 10/01/2024 15:31, Ninad Palsule wrote: >>> Hello Krzysztof, >>> >>> >>> >>>>>>> I have send it as a separate commit. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20231214144954.3833998-1-ninad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ >>>>>> Why did you do that? It now just adds undocumented compatibles to the >>>>>> driver. Please, as Rob requested, work with Lukas on his series to make >>>>>> sure that these devices are documented. >>>>> I think krzysztof kozlowski suggested to send these patches separately: >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/1c5ace65-2fd8-4503-b22f-e0f564d1c83f@xxxxxxxxxx/ >>>>> >>>>> Did I misunderstood it? Do you guys want me to include that commit again? >>>> My comment was in DTS thread under specific DTS patch. How did you >>>> figure out it applies to driver and bindings? This does not make sense. >>> Sorry for the misunderstanding. Where do you want me to add driver >>> patch? Before all DTS patches or after all DTS patches? >> Does not matter, why do you insist on combining them with DTS? Drivers >> and bindings are going together. DTS better separate, although depending >> on the case can be together. >> > I have combined DTS and Driver because DTS was using compatibility > string which is not upstream yet hence I thought it is logical to send > it under same patchset. Sometimes yes, sometimes not. DTS must not go via driver subsystem, so sending it in the same patchset has implications on maintainers applying it. Some like it, some don't and you will be nagged for combining them. Best regards, Krzysztof
