RE: [PATCH v3 2/5] dt-bindings: mfd: Add ADI MAX77541/MAX77540

[Sahin, Okan]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 7:44 PM
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>On 31/01/2023 13:02, Sahin, Okan wrote:
>>>> +  regulators:
>>>> +    $ref: /schemas/regulator/adi,max77541-regulator.yaml#
>>>
>>> No improvements regarding bisectability - this patch fails. If you
>>> tested this patch, you would see it.
>>>
>>> Instead of ignoring comments, either implement them or ask for clarification.
>>>
>>>
>> Sorry for misunderstanding, I checked patchset as a whole not one by one this is
>why I did not get failure after "make dt_binding_check " . Right now, I understand
>why you are saying this patch fails, but what is your suggestion?  what is the
>correct order for this patchset? I sent adi,max77541-regulator.yaml in path 4/5.
>In the light of discussion, should I remove all the parts related to regulator in
>patch 2/5, then add adi,max77541-regulator.yaml and update
>adi,max77541.yaml in patch 4/5? or should I add new patch to update
>adi,max77541.yaml?
>
>Regulator binding patch should be first in the series (bindings are before usage),
>then the MFD binding should come. Your cover letter should clearly at the top
>mention the dependency. You can also mention dependency in MFD patch after --
>-, because many of us do not really read cover letters...
>
>
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof,

Thank you for your feedback. I tried to explain in cover letter .However, I understand that it was not clear enough. I do not want to take your time, but let me ask one thing to understand the case completely. Right now, my order is like below
[cover letter]->[mfd driver]->[mfd binding]->[regulator driver]->[regulator binding]->[adc]. 
Should I completely change the ordering  e.g. starting with regulator ending with mfd or is it sufficient to just get the regulator binding just before the mfd bindings?

Regards,
Okan