When posting a patch series that includes both code implementing a
Device Tree binding and its associated documentation, the DT docs
should come in the series before the implementation.
This not only avoids checkpatch.pl to complain about undocumented
bindings but also makes the review process easier.
Document this convention since it may not be obvious.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.marti...@collabora.co.uk>
---
Changes since v1:
- Small typo error, sorry for the noise.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt
index 042a027..b7ba01a 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt
@@ -12,6 +12,9 @@ I. For patch submitters
devicet...@vger.kernel.org
+ 3) The Documentation/ portion of the patch should come in the series before
+ the code implementing the binding.
+
II. For kernel maintainers
1) If you aren't comfortable reviewing a given binding, reply to it and ask
--
2.1.0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
