Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: Add vendor prefix for Caninos Loucos

[Andreas FÃrber]

Hi Matheus,

Am 07.03.20 um 01:24 schrieb Matheus Castello:
> The Caninos Loucos Program develops Single Board Computers with an open
> structure. The Program wants to form a community of developers to use
> the IoT technology and disseminate the learning of embedded systems in

I would suggest "IoT technologies" without "the".

> Brazil.
>
> The boards are designed and manufactured by LSI-TEC NPO.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matheus Castello <matheus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> index 9e67944bec9c..3e974dd563cf 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> @@ -167,6 +167,8 @@ patternProperties:
>       description: Calxeda
>     "^capella,.*":
>       description: Capella Microsystems, Inc
> +  "^caninos,.*":
> +    description: Caninos Loucos LSI-TEC NPO

Alphabetical order: n goes before p.

I'm confused by the description... Either this Caninos Loucos is an 
independent vendor and gets its own prefix, or it's LSI-Tec and uses 
something like lsi-tec,caninosloucos-foo. Please clarify commit message 
and/or description line, at least by inserting something like "program 
by", "brand by" or the like rather than just concatenating names. Maybe 
compare UDOO by SECO. Is caninos,foo unique enough or should it be 
caninosloucos,foo? (crazy canines?)

Note that I usually attempt to CC the organizations I'm assigning a 
vendor prefix for. Do you represent them or coordinated with them?

Regards,
Andreas

>     "^cascoda,.*":
>       description: Cascoda, Ltd.
>     "^catalyst,.*":

--
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 NÃrnberg, Germany
GF: Felix ImendÃrffer
HRB 36809 (AG NÃrnberg)