On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Rob Herring <r...@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 <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > > From: Greentime Hu <green...@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~
