Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <3072bc2f-6d99-8e52-ee4c-82d5bd46fa5a@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 22 Dec 2022 14:51:00 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.6.0
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] dt-bindings: Document common device controller
 bindings
To:     Gatien CHEVALLIER <gatien.chevallier@foss.st.com>,
        alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        Oleksii_Moisieiev@epam.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc:     linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        loic.pallardy@st.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        mark.rutland@arm.com, arnd@arndb.de
References: <20221221173055.11719-1-gatien.chevallier@foss.st.com>
 <20221221173055.11719-2-gatien.chevallier@foss.st.com>
 <2a4b5094-013f-f873-4c0e-bb48ca6ac19e@kernel.org>
 <6e14aecb-e6f5-ec10-a5c5-af6fd1b54e89@foss.st.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <6e14aecb-e6f5-ec10-a5c5-af6fd1b54e89@foss.st.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 22/12/2022 14:01, Gatien CHEVALLIER wrote:
> 

>>
>> Anyway you duplicate work here:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/c869d2751125181a55bc8a88c96e3a892b42f37a.1668070216.git.oleksii_moisieiev@epam.com/
>> and maybe you duplicate comments.
>>
>> I don't think there is point to review things twice, so NAK.
> This is a result of me not knowing how to handle this particular case. 
> It is a patch that I need to have in my patch set in order to pass Rob's 
> bindings check. Otherwise, feature domains bindings defined here will 
> not be known in the STM32 System Bus binding file, where they are used.
> 
> I wanted to illustrate the use of Oleksii's binding with a practical 
> use-case that we want to implement.

Mention patch dependency in the path changelog (---) and that's it. No
tests will be done. You are expected to run tests anyway on your side,
before sending.

> 
> What would be the correct way of managing this dependency?
> -Specify something like "On top of ...." in the cover letter/patch and 
> reference the other thread?
> -Use a "Depends-On" tag on the YAML binding commit?
> -Something else?

Best regards,
Krzysztof