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;
Date:   Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:33:27 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To:     Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Cc:     Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>,
        linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [1/2] dt-bindings: net: broadcom-bluetooth: Add CYW4373A0 DT
 binding
Message-ID: <20221102163327.GA4006397-robh@kernel.org>
References: <20221031204804.195267-1-marex@denx.de>
 <6360471e.4a0a0220.4aceb.91b7@mx.google.com>
 <a7485b76-b4aa-a6d6-b509-c6f370380926@denx.de>
 <CABBYNZLpaT7FCwXrGq8RU4owP74VA7Eo99jceFzVsqqVnYFaHw@mail.gmail.com>
 <52c65cd1-9631-50a7-aded-7e4a877bbad9@denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <52c65cd1-9631-50a7-aded-7e4a877bbad9@denx.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 11:52:23PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 11/1/22 23:44, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> > Hi Marek,
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Linux Documentation/devicetree/bindings seems to start with dt-bindings:
> prefix always, so maybe we should keep it that way ?

Yes.