On Thu, 2019-01-31 at 12:40 +1100, tom burkart wrote:
> Quoting Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>:
> --------
> Subject Re: [PATCH v14 2/3] dt-bindings: pps: pps-gpio PPS ECHO implementation
>
> I think this patch it's OK but I'm asking to myself if it should be
> merged with
> next one... logically it describes what patch 3/3 does so why do we keep them
> separated?
> -------
> I have separated it because scripts/checkpatch.pl insists it needs to
> be separated.
checkpatch doesn't insist on anything. It's a stupid script.
Always prefer your best judgment over a stupid script.
Quoting Joe Perches <[email protected]>:
> On Thu, 2019-01-31 at 12:40 +1100, tom burkart wrote:
>> Quoting Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>:
>> --------
>> Subject Re: [PATCH v14 2/3] dt-bindings: pps: pps-gpio PPS ECHO
>> implementation
>>
>> I think this patch it's OK but I'm asking to myself if it should be
>> merged with
>> next one... logically it describes what patch 3/3 does so why do we
>> keep them
>> separated?
>> -------
>> I have separated it because scripts/checkpatch.pl insists it needs to
>> be separated.
>
> checkpatch doesn't insist on anything. It's a stupid script.
>
> Always prefer your best judgment over a stupid script.
Further references:
From Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt:
1) The Documentation/ and include/dt-bindings/ portion of the patch should
be a separate patch. The preferred subject prefix for binding patches is:
"dt-bindings: <binding dir>: ..."
Tom