lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/1] Documentation: dt-bindings: Explain order in patch series
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@collabora.co.uk>

Following the discussion around [1], this makes sense to me, so:

Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>

Mark.

[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/54356666.4090003@collabora.co.uk

> ---
>
> 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
>
> devicetree@vger.kernel.org
>
> + 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
> --
> 2.1.0
>
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-10-14 12:01    [W:2.127 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site