linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] ARM: dts: STiH407: Add B2120 board support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 20 May 2014 09:53:57 +0200
From:	Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@...com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Cc:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...com>,
	Stuart Menefy <stuart.menefy@...com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"kernel@...inux.com" <kernel@...inux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] ARM: dts: STiH407: Add B2120 board support



On 05/20/2014 09:43 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>> +       soc {
>>>>> +               sbc_serial0: serial@...0000 {
>>>>> +                       status = "okay";
>>>>> +               };
>>>>
>>>> You might want to consider reference-based syntax here instead, so you
>>>> don't have to mimic the hierarchy. That'd be (at the root level of the
>>>> file, below this secion:
>>>>
>>>> &sbc_serial0: {
>>>>          status = "okay";
>>>> };
>>>
>>> I'm personally not keen on this scheme.  It's sometimes helpful to know
>>> the hierarchy and I don't think it's a large overhead to format the
>>> subordinate DTS files in this way.
>>>
>>> Please consider not enforcing this.
>>
>> Definitely not enforcing it, and I didn't use to like it either but it
>> has some real upsides.
>>
>> In particular, it saves a lot of grief when you're changing something
>> like the unit-id of a node in .dtsi and forget to do the same update
>> in the dts.
>
> I'm not entirely sure what a unit-id is, but I can see that there
> would be benefits to using the referenced-based syntax as you call
> it.  If any of those benefits hold true here I won't push back, but I
> would personally like to see us default to the hierarchical scheme.


+1, I would prefer to keep the hierarchical scheme.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/