diff mbox series

[2/2] docs: process: maintainer-soc-clean-dts: linux-next is decisive

Message ID 20250225184822.213296-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series [1/2] docs: dt: submitting-patches: Document sending DTS patches | expand

Commit Message

Krzysztof Kozlowski Feb. 25, 2025, 6:48 p.m. UTC
Devicetree bindings patches go usually via driver subsystem tree, so
obviously testing only SoC branches would result in new dtbs_check
warnings.  Mention that linux-next branch is decisice for zero-warnings
rule.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Rob Herring (Arm) Feb. 26, 2025, 3:29 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 07:48:22PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Devicetree bindings patches go usually via driver subsystem tree, so
> obviously testing only SoC branches would result in new dtbs_check
> warnings.  Mention that linux-next branch is decisice for zero-warnings
> rule.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
> index 1b32430d0cfc..5423fb7d6047 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
> @@ -17,8 +17,9 @@ Strict DTS DT Schema and dtc Compliance
>  No changes to the SoC platform Devicetree sources (DTS files) should introduce
>  new ``make dtbs_check W=1`` warnings.  Warnings in a new board DTS, which are
>  results of issues in an included DTSI file, are considered existing, not new
> -warnings.  The platform maintainers have automation in place which should point
> -out any new warnings.
> +warnings.  For series split between different trees (DT bindings go via driver
> +subsystem tree), warnings on linux-next are decisive.  The platform maintainers
> +have automation in place which should point out any new warnings.

I see a lot of warnings due to dependencies (both bindings and other dts 
changes) not be applied yet (or applied but not in linux-next). I've 
been filtering those out, but maybe they're useful? Some are things like 
missing labels, so dtc fails. I think that gets run enough a failure 
report on it isn't too useful.

Rob
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
index 1b32430d0cfc..5423fb7d6047 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-soc-clean-dts.rst
@@ -17,8 +17,9 @@  Strict DTS DT Schema and dtc Compliance
 No changes to the SoC platform Devicetree sources (DTS files) should introduce
 new ``make dtbs_check W=1`` warnings.  Warnings in a new board DTS, which are
 results of issues in an included DTSI file, are considered existing, not new
-warnings.  The platform maintainers have automation in place which should point
-out any new warnings.
+warnings.  For series split between different trees (DT bindings go via driver
+subsystem tree), warnings on linux-next are decisive.  The platform maintainers
+have automation in place which should point out any new warnings.
 
 If a commit introducing new warnings gets accepted somehow, the resulting
 issues shall be fixed in reasonable time (e.g. within one release) or the