Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Documentation: dt-bindings: Explain order in patch series
From: Mark Rutland
Date: Tue Oct 14 2014 - 05:26:27 EST
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 07:24:07PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> When posting a patch series that includes both code implementing a
> Device Tree binding and its associated documentation, the DT docs
> should come in the series before the implementation.
> This not only avoids checkpatch.pl to complain about undocumented
> bindings but also makes the review process easier.
> Document this convention since it may not be obvious.
> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Following the discussion around , this makes sense to me, so:
Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
> Changes since v1:
> - Small typo error, sorry for the noise.
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt
> index 042a027..b7ba01a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt
> @@ -12,6 +12,9 @@ I. For patch submitters
> + 3) The Documentation/ portion of the patch should come in the series before
> + the code implementing the binding.
> II. For kernel maintainers
> 1) If you aren't comfortable reviewing a given binding, reply to it and ask
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/