On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 06:14:57PM +0000, Verdun, Jean-Marie wrote: > > This is far too big for a single patch. It needs to be broken into > > functional chunks that can be reviewed individually. Each driver and > > each device tree change along with it's accompanying code need to be > > done in individual patches. The way it is it can't be reviewed in any > > sane manner. > > > -corey > > Thanks for your feedback. We are getting a little bit lost here, as our plan was to submit initial > > - bindings > - dts for SoC and 1 board > - initial platform init code > > Then drivers code avoiding to send many dts updates which might complexify the review. We wanted to send all drivers code to relevant reviewers by tomorrow. > > So, what you are asking ( do not worry I am not trying to negotiate, I just want to avoid English misunderstandings as I am French) is to send per driver > > - binding > - dts update > - driver code > > For each driver through different submission (with each of them containing the 3 associated parts) ? Arnd gave an excellent explaination for this. To be clear, you need to split out changes to individual subsystems and submit those to the maintainers for that subsystem and not send them to everyone. That way you reduce sending emails to people who don't need to see them. Once you have a set of patches for a subsystem, you can submit them as one set. That is generally preferred. The "git send-email" or "git format-patch" tools are generally what we use, they let you compose a header message where you can give an overall explaination, then it sends the individual changes as followup messages to the header message. -corey > > What shall be the initial one in our case as we are introducing a platform ? An empty dts infrastructure and then we make it grow one step at a time ? > > vejmarie > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openipmi-developer mailing list > Openipmi-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer
