Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221031204804.195267-1-marex@denx.de> <6360471e.4a0a0220.4aceb.91b7@mx.google.com>
 <a7485b76-b4aa-a6d6-b509-c6f370380926@denx.de>
In-Reply-To: <a7485b76-b4aa-a6d6-b509-c6f370380926@denx.de>
From:   Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Nov 2022 15:44:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CABBYNZLpaT7FCwXrGq8RU4owP74VA7Eo99jceFzVsqqVnYFaHw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [1/2] dt-bindings: net: broadcom-bluetooth: Add CYW4373A0 DT binding
To:     Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Cc:     linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Marek,

On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:38 PM Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
>
> On 10/31/22 23:07, bluez.test.bot@gmail.com wrote:
> > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> >
> > Dear submitter,
> >
> > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=690631
> >
> > ---Test result---
> >
> > Test Summary:
> > CheckPatch                    PASS      2.99 seconds
> > GitLint                       PASS      1.48 seconds
> > SubjectPrefix                 FAIL      0.58 seconds
>
> Should the DT bindings really have Bluetooth: prefix/tag too ?
> git log on prior art indicates they shouldn't .

If it is meant for bluetooth-next then yes it shall contain it since
the CI does attempt to check its presence, in the other hand we could
perhaps use the prefix [bluetooth] to avoid having the CI run on
patches that are not meant for bluetooth-next but I don't think other
subsystem do require this so it sort of hard to enforce proper
prefixing.

-- 
Luiz Augusto von Dentz