Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1607704424-16223-1-git-send-email-u0084500@gmail.com>
 <1607704424-16223-2-git-send-email-u0084500@gmail.com> <20201214095916.4g47zlueng4wa3hv@holly.lan>
 <CADiBU38wZ+yrfjbggJyY7BHc5-tdV-KWVgWBmZn-q3EY99=PPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201214151409.qdqh2i5hr4g3eboe@holly.lan> <20201215075308.GI5029@dell>
In-Reply-To: <20201215075308.GI5029@dell>
From:   ChiYuan Huang <u0084500@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Dec 2020 17:03:45 +0800
Message-ID: <CADiBU3-MesTvXm31+W1szXDnYOm=2E21J=a3nP2LZ0i7Rs+Kkw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] backlight: rt4831: Adds DT binding document for
 Richtek RT4831 backlight
To:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
Cc:     Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        cy_huang <cy_huang@richtek.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Hi, Lee:

Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> =E6=96=BC 2020=E5=B9=B412=E6=9C=8815=E6=97=
=A5 =E9=80=B1=E4=BA=8C =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=883:53=E5=AF=AB=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
>
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2020, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:40:55PM +0800, ChiYuan Huang wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org> =E6=96=BC 2020=E5=B9=B41=
2=E6=9C=8814=E6=97=A5 =E9=80=B1=E4=B8=80 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=885:59=E5=AF=AB=E9=
=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> > > >
> > > > Hi CY
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 12:33:43AM +0800, cy_huang wrote:
> > > > > From: ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@richtek.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Adds DT binding document for Richtek RT4831 backlight.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@richtek.com>
> > > >
> > > > This patch got keyword filtered and brought to my attention
> > > > but the rest of the series did not.
> > > >
> > > > If it was a backlight patch series you need to send it To: the
> > > > all the backlight maintainers.
> > > >
> > > Yes, I'm waiting for mfd reviewing.
> > > Due to mfd patch, I need to add backlight dt-binding patch prior to
> > > backlight source code.
> > > Or autobuild robot will said mfd dt-binding build fail from Rob.
> > > That's why I send the backlight dt-binding prior to the source code.
> > >
> > > I still have backlight/regulator source code patch after mfd reviewin=
g.
> > > Do you want me to send all the patches without waiting for mfd review=
ing?
> >
> > To some extent it's up to you.
> >
> > I think I would have shared all the pieces at once (although not it Lee=
,
> > as mfd maintainer, had suggested otherwise).
>
> You should not need to concern yourself with patch ordering outside
> of the realms of the set i.e. [PATCH 1/x], [PATCH 2/x], etc.
>
> If you just send the whole patch set and you do not specify otherwise,
> it will be applied, in order, as a set.
>
> Sending subsystem patches without the correct maintainers as recipients
> is bad form.  Many of us have filters on, so this tactic will seldom
> work in any case.
>

In my case, there're mfd/backlight/regulator for RT4831.
You mean I can just send the whole patch set directly to whole
mfd/backlight/regulator maintainers.
And you can filter like as the keyword to review the related contents, righ=
t?

From my original thought, the order is mfd -> backlight-> regulator,
one by one due to different maintainers.
Maybe I think too much about the patch ordering

If so, after getting the comment from Rob, I'll send the whole patch to you=
.
Thanks for the notice.
> --
> Lee Jones [=E6=9D=8E=E7=90=BC=E6=96=AF]
> Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
> Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for Arm SoCs
> Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog