On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Mark Brown [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 09:48:09AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:52:07PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

quoted

Personally, I'd prefer "dt-bindings: sound: blah...", but not enough to
argue with Mark about it. If that is not the prefix, then it should at
least have "binding" in the subject.

quoted

+1

quoted

The prefix of sound bindings is quite unique from other subsystems.
Looking at the prefix of Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/
commits, I'm always confused whether it's a pure binding commit
or just submitted as part of the driver patch.  I feel that we
kinda lose the point of having a prefix.

That's really not what's happening reliably - other subsystems also seem
to have a bunch of things prefixed for the subsystem and the DT specific
prefixes are all over the shop, people seem to be making them up at
random.

I'm getting more picky about the subject and splitting bindings to a
separate patch, but generally only when I have other comments. And
I've had to get some maintainers to stop combining commits as they
apply them.

Maybe get_maintainers.pl could spit out the desired prefix and
checkpatch check it. Evidently, running "git log --oneline" is too
hard.

If DT binding review were something that reliably and
consistently happened and didn't affect the subsystem I'd perhaps buy it
but for run of the mill stuff it seems like getting things reviewed in
the subsystem is more important.

I review everything that gets sent to the DT list unless maintainers
apply it first. I'll still comment afterwards if there's anything
significant (or I missed that it was applied :)).

Rob