Re: [PATCH v4] net: ethernet: faraday: To support device tree usage.
From: Rob Herring
Date: Fri Feb 10 2017 - 10:07:09 EST
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 5:59 AM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:09:20PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 6:34 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > From: Greentime Hu <green.hu@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > > Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:46:14 +0800
>> > >> We also use the same binding document to describe the same faraday ethernet
>> > >> controller and add faraday to vendor-prefixes.txt.
>> > >
>> > > Why are you renaming the MOXA binding file instead of adding a completely new one
>> > > for faraday? The MOXA one should stick around, I don't see a justification for
>> > > removing it.
>> > This was my suggestion, basically fixing the name of the existing
>> > binding, which was
>> > accidentally named after one of the users rather than the company that did the
>> > hardware.
>> > We can't change the compatible string, but I'd much prefer having only
>> > one binding
>> > file for this device rather than two separate ones that could possibly become
>> > incompatible in case we add new properties to them. If there is only
>> > one of them,
>> > naming it according to the hardware design is the general policy.
>> > Note that we currently have two separate device drivers, but that is more a
>> > historic artifact, and if we ever get around to merging them into one driver,
>> > that should not impact the binding.
>> The change is fine with me, but the subject and commit message need some
> Hi, Rob:
> Would you please advise me of the proper subject and commit messages?
Split the binding to a separate commit and summarize the email
discussion here. For a subject, something like this:
"dt-bindings: net: generalize moxart-mac to support all faraday based ftmac IP"