Krzysztof Kozlowski [off-list ref] writes:

On 12/10/2022 04:39, jerome Neanne wrote:

quoted

quoted

You explained what you did, which is easily visible. You did not explain
why you are doing it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Thanks for pointing me to the detailed guidelines
I'm new to upstream and not well aware of all good practices.

Would below commit message be more suitable:

Add support for the TPS65219 PMIC by enabling MFD, regulator and 
power-button drivers.  All drivers enabled as modules.

This still says only what you did. I still does not explain why.

Jerome, maybe adding a bit of preamble like:

"Development boards from TI include the TPS65219 PMIC.  Add support..."

Krzysztof, I'm the first to argue for descriptive/verbose changelogs,
but IMO, this is getting a little bit nit-picky.

The series adds a new driver, DTS and defconfig patches to enable
support the new driver.  The "why" for changes to defconfig changes like
this are kind of implied/obvious, and there is lots of precedent for
changelogs of defconfig changes for simple drivers to simply say "enable
X and Y".

If my above suggesion is not enough, please make a suggestion for what
you think would qualify as an appropritate changelong that answers "why"
for a simple driver change.

Kevin





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