From: Javier Martinez Canillas <hidden> Date: 2017-03-29 18:25:47
The driver contains compatible strings for different models, but the DT
binding doc only lists one of them. Add the remaining to the document.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -1,7 +1,12 @@ * GSL 1680 touchscreen controller Required properties:-- compatible : "silead,gsl1680"+- compatible : Must be one of the following, depending on the model:+ "silead,gsl1680"+ "silead,gsl1688"+ "silead,gsl3670"+ "silead,gsl3675"+ "silead,gsl3692" - reg : I2C slave address of the chip (0x40) - interrupt-parent : a phandle pointing to the interrupt controller serving the interrupt for this chip
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> Date: 2017-04-03 15:25:47
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:25:31PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
The driver contains compatible strings for different models, but the DT
binding doc only lists one of them. Add the remaining to the document.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
"dt-bindings: input: ..." is preferred for the subject, but no need to
respin just for that.
Acked-by: Rob Herring <redacted>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <hidden> Date: 2017-04-03 15:52:06
Hello Rob,
On 04/03/2017 11:25 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:25:31PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
quoted
The driver contains compatible strings for different models, but the DT
binding doc only lists one of them. Add the remaining to the document.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
"dt-bindings: input: ..." is preferred for the subject, but no need to
respin just for that.
Can we document it in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt?
I'm asking because is true that at the beginning we used "dt-bindings: foo" for
all DT bindings patches but then many (most?) maintainers started asking for the
subsystem subject line to be used for both drivers and DT bindings docs since
they would be merging both and also they could miss the DT bindings patches if
their subsystem prefix was not used.
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 10:25:43AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:25:31PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
quoted
The driver contains compatible strings for different models, but the DT
binding doc only lists one of them. Add the remaining to the document.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
"dt-bindings: input: ..." is preferred for the subject, but no need to
respin just for that.
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> Date: 2017-04-03 21:15:56
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas
[off-list ref] wrote:
Hello Rob,
On 04/03/2017 11:25 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:25:31PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
quoted
The driver contains compatible strings for different models, but the DT
binding doc only lists one of them. Add the remaining to the document.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
"dt-bindings: input: ..." is preferred for the subject, but no need to
respin just for that.
Can we document it in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt?
Yes. Actually, I was thinking of adding the preferred prefixes to
MAINTAINERS. Then checkpatch.pl could check it perhaps.
I'm asking because is true that at the beginning we used "dt-bindings: foo" for
all DT bindings patches but then many (most?) maintainers started asking for the
subsystem subject line to be used for both drivers and DT bindings docs since
they would be merging both and also they could miss the DT bindings patches if
their subsystem prefix was not used.
I'd argue that most subsys maintainers don't (or they just change it
when applying). Mark B does the most. I'm not going to waste any time
arguing over it if folks want something different. I'm mainly trying
to get rid of subjects like "Documentation: devicetree: bindings:
Document the DT binding for foo-bar". :)
Rob
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <hidden> Date: 2017-04-03 21:23:16
Hello Rob,
On 04/03/2017 05:15 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hello Rob,
On 04/03/2017 11:25 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:25:31PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
quoted
The driver contains compatible strings for different models, but the DT
binding doc only lists one of them. Add the remaining to the document.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
"dt-bindings: input: ..." is preferred for the subject, but no need to
respin just for that.
Can we document it in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt?
Yes. Actually, I was thinking of adding the preferred prefixes to
MAINTAINERS. Then checkpatch.pl could check it perhaps.
That would be great.
quoted
I'm asking because is true that at the beginning we used "dt-bindings: foo" for
all DT bindings patches but then many (most?) maintainers started asking for the
subsystem subject line to be used for both drivers and DT bindings docs since
they would be merging both and also they could miss the DT bindings patches if
their subsystem prefix was not used.
I'd argue that most subsys maintainers don't (or they just change it
when applying). Mark B does the most. I'm not going to waste any time
arguing over it if folks want something different. I'm mainly trying
to get rid of subjects like "Documentation: devicetree: bindings:
Document the DT binding for foo-bar". :)
Yeah, I don't have a strong opinion. I just want an authoritative doc
so I can refer subsystems maintainers to when they argue that I should
use their subsystem prefix instead of "dt-bindings: foo: ..." :)
Rob
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America