Hi Krzysztof,
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 9:24 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 14/09/2023 17:26, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 6:03 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 07:51:41AM +0300, Claudiu wrote:
> >>> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> Add RZ/G3S (R9A08G045) Clock Pulse Generator (CPG) core clocks, module
> >>> clocks and resets.
> >>
> >> This is part of the binding, so it can be squashed with the previous
> >> patch. The ack there still stands.
> >
> > Usually we keep it as a separate patch, to be queued in an immutable
> > branch, as it is included by both the clock driver and by DTS, but
> > not by the yaml bindings file.
>
> Binding also should be shared, so you get compatible documented in both
> places (thus lack of checkpatch warnings). It still should be one patch.
Hmm, I see your point...
For core Renesas SoCs components where I am (sub)maintainer for both
the driver subsystem and the DTS, I can take care of that.
For the generic case, that will need a lot of cooperation with subsystem
maintainers, to create lots of small immutable branches with DT bindings
and DT binding definition updates.
Alternatively, are you (the DT maintainers) prepared to handle all
DT bindings and DT binding definition updates, and create immutable
branches for all of them (in a timely manner, of course)?
Then we can start enforcing the rule that driver and DTS updates must
not cause checkpatch warnings for missing compatible values, and must
not be applied without merging the corresponding immutable branch first.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
