From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: jbrunet@baylibre.com (jbrunet at baylibre.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 23:19:05 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 00/14] arm64: dts: meson-axg: add audio support
In-Reply-To: <CAFBinCBh-b=ie4hBMWdHG8KoLQ7qiRfo8vXfJ1PRcN4UPtg+uA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20180724125238.14567-1-jbrunet@baylibre.com>
 <CAFBinCBh-b=ie4hBMWdHG8KoLQ7qiRfo8vXfJ1PRcN4UPtg+uA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <705e31bf0d978b7d356b2f077179ab0e3db6f092.camel@baylibre.com>
To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linus-amlogic.lists.infradead.org

On Wed, 2018-07-25 at 21:11 +0200, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> nit-pick: one patch uses "arm64: dts: meson-axg: s400" in the subject
> while other patches that are touching the s400 board aren't
> if you have to re-send this series: can you please use the "arm64:
> dts: meson-axg: s400:" prefix for all patches touching the s400 board?

hum, do we really have such rule, or do you think we should add one ?
Kevin, do you have opinion ?

Not that I really mind either way, but prefixes rules are usually there to help
maintainer filter the patches. Will such rule help in any way ?