Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 18 Jan 2025 10:25:00 +0100 | | From | Dragan Simic <> | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v1 4/6] arm64: dts: rockchip: add rk3328 usb3 phy node |
| |
Hello Krzysztof,
On 2025-01-18 09:46, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 17/01/2025 05:10, Dragan Simic wrote: >> On 2025-01-16 17:53, Diederik de Haas wrote: >>> On Thu Jan 16, 2025 at 2:01 PM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 15/01/2025 02:26, Peter Geis wrote: >>>>> Add the node for the rk3328 usb3 phy. This node provides a combined >>>>> usb2 >>>>> and usb3 phy which are permenantly tied to the dwc3 usb3 >>>>> controller. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Geis <pgwipeout@gmail.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi | 39 >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi >>>>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi >>>>> index 7d992c3c01ce..181a900d41f9 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi >>>>> @@ -903,6 +903,43 @@ u2phy_host: host-port { >>>>> }; >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> + usb3phy: usb3-phy@ff460000 { >>>>> + compatible = "rockchip,rk3328-usb3phy"; >>>>> + reg = <0x0 0xff460000 0x0 0x10000>; >>>>> + clocks = <&cru SCLK_REF_USB3OTG>, <&cru PCLK_USB3PHY_OTG>, <&cru >>>>> PCLK_USB3PHY_PIPE>; >>>> >>>> Please wrap code according to coding style (checkpatch is not a >>>> coding >>>> style description, but only a tool), so at 80. >>> >>> I'm confused: is it 80 or 100? >>> >>> I always thought it was 80, but then I saw several patches/commits by >>> Dragan Simic which deliberately changed code to make use of 100. >>> Being fed up with my own confusion, I submitted a PR to >>> https://github.com/gregkh/kernel-coding-style/ which got accepted: >>> https://github.com/gregkh/kernel-coding-style/commit/5c21f99dc79883bd0efeba368193180275c9c77a >>> >>> So now both the vim plugins code and README say 100. >>> But as noted in my commit message: >>> >>> Note that the current upstream 'Linux kernel coding style' does NOT >>> mention the 100 char limit, but only mentions the preferred max >>> length >>> of 80. >>> >>> Or is it 100 for code, but 80 for DeviceTree files and bindings? >> >> I don't know about the DT files and bindings, but the 100-column limit >> for the kernel code has been in effect for years. In this day and >> age, > > That's just false. It was never in effect for years. Read kernel coding > style document.
Perhaps it's about the semantics.
Please see the commit bdc48fa11e46 (checkpatch/coding-style: deprecate 80-column warning, 2020-05-29), which clearly shows that the 80-column rule is still _preferred_, but no longer _mandatory_.
>> 80 columns is really not much (for the record, I've been around when >> using 80x25 _physical_ CRT screens was the norm). > > You mistake agreement on dropping strong restriction in 2020 in > checkpatch, which is "not for years" and even read that commit: "Yes, > staying withing 80 columns is certainly still _preferred_." > > Checkpatch is not coding style. Since when it would be? It's just a > tool. > > And there were more talks and the 80-preference got relaxed yet still > "not for years" (last talk was 2022?) and sill kernel coding style is > here specific.
It's perhaps again about the semantics, this time about the meaning of "for years". I don't think there's some strict definition of that term, so perhaps different people see it differently.
To get back to the above-mentioned commit bdc48fa11e46, the 80-column limit has obviously been lifted, putting the new 100-column limit as an option for those who prefer having fewer "artificial" line breaks over adhering strictly to the rules.
Thus, as a maintainer, you're obviously free to enforce the 80-column limit of you want so.
If my opinion counts, I'd agree with the 80-column limit when it comes to the device trees and bindings. Keeping those files at the lower width usually makes them more readable to me. However, enforcing the 80-column limit in C and header files very often leads to having line breaks that do nothing but make the code look a bit silly.
|  |