On Sun Jul 5, 2026 at 1:38 AM BST, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 04:06:36PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2026 at 08:38:14PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
>> > Came across a recent commit bc58905eb07 ("samples: rust_misc_device: use
>> > vertical import style") and found a few more locations that could
>> > benefit from this cleanup. No functional changes.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Guru Das Srinagesh <[email protected]>
>> > ---
>> > Guru Das Srinagesh (7):
>> > samples: rust_dma: use vertical import style
>> > pwm: th1520: use vertical import style
>> > cpufreq: rcpufreq_dt: use vertical import style
>> > block: rnull: use vertical import style
>> > net: phy: ax88796b: use vertical import style
>> > net: phy: qt2025: use vertical import style
>> > drm/nova: use vertical import style
>>
>> You have multiple subsystems here, so you need to split this patch
>> setup, per subsystem, and submit them separately. Maintainers only
>> accept patchsets for their own subsystems.
>>
>> For netdev, please take a read of:
>>
>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-netdev.html
>>
>> You need to get the correct tree, and set the Subject: line correctly.
>>
>> Andrew
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> I was aware of the per-subsystem rule, but reasoned that since these changes
> are
> purely about Rust import formatting coding style with no functional impact on
> any
> subsystem, they might go through the rust-for-linux tree with acks from the
> respective subsystem maintainers. The Rust coding style is independent of any
> subsystem-specific guidelines.
Patches should usually be merged via their usual tree, otherwise you're just
creating unnecessary merge conflicts.
There are obiviously exceptions to this for series that need to touch multiple
subsystems and cannot be split, but it is not the case for this sort of small
cleanups.
Best,
Gary
>
> Is that reasoning off-base, or is the right path to split these out per
> subsystem
> regardless?
