On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 9:15 PM Liu Ying [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi,

On Fri, 2020-12-18 at 16:42 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 7:48 PM Liu Ying [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On Thu, 2020-12-17 at 12:50 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 17:59:23 +0800, Liu Ying wrote:

quoted

This patch adds bindings for i.MX8qm/qxp pixel combiner.

Signed-off-by: Liu Ying <victor.liu@nxp.com>
---
 .../display/bridge/fsl,imx8qxp-pixel-combiner.yaml | 160
+++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 160 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,imx8qxp-
pixel-combiner.yaml

My bot found errors running 'make dt_binding_check' on your
patch:

yamllint warnings/errors:

dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,imx8qxp-
pixel-combiner.example.dts:19:18: fatal error: dt-
bindings/clock/imx8-lpcg.h: No such file or directory
   19 |         #include <dt-bindings/clock/imx8-lpcg.h>
      |                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compilation terminated.
make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:342:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,imx8qxp-
pixel-combiner.example.dt.yaml] Error 1
make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make: *** [Makefile:1364: dt_binding_check] Error 2

See
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.ozlabs.org%2Fpatch%2F1417599&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cvictor.liu%40nxp.com%7C96806e0ce6bc40c936fa08d8a3a64551%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637439281816690986%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=Cjyszb0alRE5z2OGKdZZEg5PQpH11U%2BGqVt6couCLGE%3D&amp;reserved=0

This check can fail if there are any dependencies. The base for a
patch
series is generally the most recent rc1.

This series can be applied to linux-next/master branch.

I can't know that to apply and run checks automatically. I guessed
that reviewing this before sending, but I want it abundantly clear
what the result of applying this might be and it wasn't mentioned in
this patch.

Plus linux-next is a base no one can apply patches to, so should you
be sending patches based on it? It's also the merge window, so maybe

I sent this series based on drm-misc-next.  This series is applicable
to linux-next/master, and may pass 'make dt_binding_check' there.

But to be clear, 'make dt_binding_check' would fail on drm-misc-next
until 5.11-rc1 is merged in. The drm-misc maintainers need to know
that.

I'll mention dependencies in the future where similar situations
appear. Thanks.

BTW, does it make sense for the bot to additionaly try linux-next if
needed?  Maybe, that'll be helpful?

Sure, and when I've got nothing else to do maybe I'll do that. Though
maintainers still need to know what the dependencies are. The real
solution here is to make 'base-commit' tags more common or required so
that neither scripts/bots nor humans have to guess what the base is.

Rob

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel