lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mfd: arizona: Correct link for sound binding document
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 1:55 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2018, Rob Herring wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 12:46 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 26 Sep 2018, Rob Herring wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 04:33:22PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/arizona.txt | 2 +-
> > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > Applied.
> > >
> > > Probably won't do any harm in this instance, but it's usually better
> > > for MFD binding changes to go through the MFD tree to avoid
> > > merge-conflicts.
> >
> > It had been sitting there for a while, so I picked it up. Plus if we
>
> A little over a week is not 'a while'. :)

You're right. Probably should have waited 2 weeks. Developers
shouldn't have to wait longer than that for a response (according to
the chief penguin).

> > have conflicts within a binding (other than tree wide clean ups I do),
> > that's not a good sign that the binding is changing.
>
> Not sure I understand this.

If there are multiple sets of changes to a single binding within 1
release cycle (more than 1 really IMO), then that is a problem in and
of itself. We may want drivers enhanced feature by feature, but I
don't want bindings to. Bindings shouldn't be evolving. Maybe
sometimes different people add different things, but then they need to
work out the dependencies and conflicts, not you or me.

Rob

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-31 16:39    [W:0.037 / U:1.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site