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;
Date:   Mon, 5 Apr 2021 14:04:17 +0530
From:   Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@ti.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
CC:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
        Tero Kristo <kristo@kernel.org>, <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] dt-bindings: spi: Convert cadence-quadspi.txt to
 cadence-quadspi.yaml
Message-ID: <20210405083415.x6azwdzanvsbiljn@ti.com>
References: <20210331193930.tzsvbjup3wpxmh26@ti.com>
 <20210401141328.GH4758@sirena.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210401141328.GH4758@sirena.org.uk>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215
Precedence: bulk

On 01/04/21 03:13PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 01:09:32AM +0530, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> 
> > I did take a look by running git log on 
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/ and there is no single style 
> > being used. Using "dt-bindings: spi:" is a popular choice. Some other 
> > commits just use "spi:". And then some use "spi: dt-bindings:". The last 
> > commit to touch cadence-quadspi.txt (fcebca39938f) used the prefix 
> > "dt-bindings: spi:".
> 
> Yes, lots of people pick unfortunate subject lines for DT patches - that
> doesn't mean it's good.  I'm looking to see spi: same as for all other
> SPI patches.

All right. "spi: dt-bindings:" it is from now on.

> 
> > So on the prefix front I think the subject is good enough. Of course, if 
> > you have any other preference then it can be re-worded but let's first 
> > be clear on what the expectation is. And then let's make sure to apply 
> > it to all future patches uniformly. This way future contributors won't 
> > have to take a guess on what the expected prefix is.
> 
> I do edit some percentage of patches, but some do slip through for
> various reasons.  There's also some things that just get completely
> missed, especially if there isn't also a code patch nearby.
> 
> > Apart from the prefix is there anything else to improve? IMHO the 
> > subject is good enough but I'm open to suggestions.
> 
> There was the thing with constraints.

Will send a follow up patch to add the constraints that Vignesh 
suggested.

-- 
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
Texas Instruments Inc.