Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1576492 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v4] net: ethernet: faraday: To support device tree usage.

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v4] net: ethernet: faraday: To support device tree usage. Greentime Hu <green.hu@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 13:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v4] net: ethernet: faraday: To support device tree usage. Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> - 2017-02-10 16:10 +0100

#1576492 — Re: [PATCH v4] net: ethernet: faraday: To support device tree usage.

On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:09:20PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 6:34 PM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> > > From: Greentime Hu <green.hu@gmail.com>
> > > Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:46:14 +0800
> > >> We also use the same binding document to describe the same faraday ethernet
> > >> controller and add faraday to vendor-prefixes.txt.
> > >
> > > Why are you renaming the MOXA binding file instead of adding a completely new one
> > > for faraday?  The MOXA one should stick around, I don't see a justification for
> > > removing it.
> >
> > This was my suggestion, basically fixing the name of the existing
> > binding, which was
> > accidentally named after one of the users rather than the company that did the
> > hardware.
> >
> > We can't change the compatible string, but I'd much prefer having only
> > one binding
> > file for this device rather than two separate ones that could possibly become
> > incompatible in case we add new properties to them. If there is only
> > one of them,
> > naming it according to the hardware design is the general policy.
> >
> > Note that we currently have two separate device drivers, but that is more a
> > historic artifact, and if we ever get around to merging them into one driver,
> > that should not impact the binding.
>
> The change is fine with me, but the subject and commit message need some
> work.

Hi, Rob:

Would you please advise me of the proper subject and commit messages?
Thanks~

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1578541

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 5:59 AM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:09:20PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 6:34 PM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
>> > > From: Greentime Hu <green.hu@gmail.com>
>> > > Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:46:14 +0800
>> > >> We also use the same binding document to describe the same faraday ethernet
>> > >> controller and add faraday to vendor-prefixes.txt.
>> > >
>> > > Why are you renaming the MOXA binding file instead of adding a completely new one
>> > > for faraday?  The MOXA one should stick around, I don't see a justification for
>> > > removing it.
>> >
>> > This was my suggestion, basically fixing the name of the existing
>> > binding, which was
>> > accidentally named after one of the users rather than the company that did the
>> > hardware.
>> >
>> > We can't change the compatible string, but I'd much prefer having only
>> > one binding
>> > file for this device rather than two separate ones that could possibly become
>> > incompatible in case we add new properties to them. If there is only
>> > one of them,
>> > naming it according to the hardware design is the general policy.
>> >
>> > Note that we currently have two separate device drivers, but that is more a
>> > historic artifact, and if we ever get around to merging them into one driver,
>> > that should not impact the binding.
>>
>> The change is fine with me, but the subject and commit message need some
>> work.
>
> Hi, Rob:
>
> Would you please advise me of the proper subject and commit messages?

Split the binding to a separate commit and summarize the email
discussion here. For a subject, something like this:

"dt-bindings: net: generalize moxart-mac to support all faraday based ftmac IP"

Rob

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web