Re: [PATCH] docs: dt: submitting-patches: Remove possible confusion of combining DTS

[Luca Weiss]

Hi Krzysztof,

On Wed Feb 25, 2026 at 11:59 AM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> DTS patches were always expected to be either sent separately or put at
> the end of patchset, but the first part of paragraph regarding this rule
> used a "should be placed at the end of patchset" phrase which might
> create wrong impression. This "should be" about order of patches applies
> only to the case when DTS is combined into this patchset.
>
> Suggested-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst | 7 ++++---
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst
> index 81e27e50f905..2a5533f68830 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst
> @@ -64,9 +64,10 @@ I. For patch submitters
>  
>    7) DTS is treated in general as driver-independent hardware description, thus
>       any DTS patches, regardless whether using existing or new bindings, should
> -     be placed at the end of patchset to indicate no dependency of drivers on
> -     the DTS.  DTS will be anyway applied through separate tree or branch, so
> -     different order would indicate the series is non-bisectable.
> +     be a separate posting or, when combined with driver patches, placed at the

"when combined with driver patches"

Is there some guidance *when* this is appropriate and when it's not?

For example would touchscreen bindings & driver, and dts addition be
appropriate to combine into one patch series?

>From our discussion on IRC, you said a series covering 3 or 4 subsystems
is too much and they should be split.

Thanks for working on updating the docs!

Regards
Luca

> +     end of the patchset to indicate no dependency of drivers on the DTS.  DTS
> +     will be anyway applied through separate tree or branch, so different order
> +     would indicate the series is non-bisectable.
>  
>       If a driver subsystem maintainer prefers to apply entire set, instead of
>       their relevant portion of patchset, please split the DTS patches into