lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 03/25] arm64: dts: colibri-imx8x: Sort properties
    On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 04:17:35PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
    > On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 01:19:13PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
    > > Hello Krzysztof, first thanks for your review.
    > >
    > > Let's try to get some clarity on this with the help of Shawn.
    > >
    > > On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 01:57:38PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
    > > > On 08/03/2023 13:52, Philippe Schenker wrote:
    > > > > From: Philippe Schenker <philippe.schenker@toradex.com>
    > > > >
    > > > > Sort properties according to the following order and inside these
    > > > > alphabetically.
    > > > >
    > > > > 1. compatible
    > > > > 2. reg
    > > > > 3. standard properties
    > > > > 4. specific properties
    > > > > 5. status
    > > >
    > > > Is this approved coding style for IMX DTS?
    > >
    > > I 100% understand your concerns here.
    > >
    > > With that said let me try to briefly explain the reasoning here, in
    > > various threads we were asked in the past to move node around based on
    > > some not 100% defined rules [0][1].
    > >
    > > On Sun, 2023-01-29 at 11:19 +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
    > > >> +&usbotg1 {
    > > >> + adp-disable;
    > > >> + ci-disable-lpm;
    > > >> + hnp-disable;
    > > >> + over-current-active-low;
    > > >> + pinctrl-names = "default";
    > > >> + pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_usbotg1>;
    > > >
    > > >We generally want to put such generic properties before device specific
    > > >ones.
    > >
    > > In addition to that we find convenient to have properties sorted
    > > alphabetically when no other rule is available, it just prevents any
    > > kind of discussion, minimize merge conflicts and make comparing files
    > > easier.
    > >
    > > I also agree that the difference between "generic"/"specific" is fuzzy
    > > at best.
    > >
    > > With all that said ...
    > >
    > > Shawn: What should we do? We can of course avoid any kind of re-ordering
    > > from now on.
    >
    > We are practically asking for 1, 2 and 5 for i.MX DTS files, but pretty
    > flexible for the rest.
    >
    > > I am fine to be very pragmatic here, no-reordering on existing DTS
    > > files, newly added DTS files we discuss whatever is the reasoning of the
    > > reviewer/maintainer on a case-by-case basis.
    >
    > Sounds good to me! While I personally like your ordering, I do not want
    > it to churn the existing DTS files.

    Agreed.

    >
    > I'm happy to take this patch as a special case though :)

    Philippe just rebased all the stuff getting rid of the sort commit :-)
    No special case needed, he will send an updated series in a hour.

    Thanks a lot,
    Francesco

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2023-03-27 00:57    [W:4.081 / U:0.040 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site