linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: qcom: ipq8064: reorganize node order and sort them

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, 19 Jul 2022 10:19:32 +0200
From:   Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: qcom: ipq8064: reorganize node order and
 sort them

On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 12:22:24PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 19.07.2022 12:16, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 19/07/2022 11:59, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 at 12:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 18/07/2022 17:38, Christian Marangi wrote:
> >>>> Reorganize node order and sort them by address.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>
> >>>> This was picked from for-next qcom branch [1]. Reorganize dtsi as requested.
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/qcom/linux.git/?h=for-next
> >>>
> >>> If this is picked by qcom branch, no need to resend it.
> >>>
> >>> I don't see value in such reshuffle. Reviewing is not possible and you
> >>> did not mention tests (results should be equal).
> >>
> >> The value is usual for all the cleanups: make it follow the
> >> established practice.
> > 
> > Are you sure this is established practice?
> Yes.
> 
>  New DTSI files (see SC8280XP,
> > sm8450 although sc7280 looked ordered) do not always follow it, so why
> > imposing it for existing code?
> Perhaps it slipped through review.. Partially my bad.
> 
> 
> Such reshuffle can cause conflicts thus
> > stops parallel development. Review is close to impossible...
> Almost any addition or removal also causes conflicts, because git is
> not as smart as we would like it to be. If the commit is structured
> properly (i.e. it *only* changes the order and nothing else),
> decompiling the dtbs before and after applying it and using a tool
> like meld that can find similar chunks of text at different offsets
> review is definitely possible, though not very pleasant (you can't
> just diff them, as order is preserved & phandles change due to that)
> as you have to look at it manually and can't tell much by just taking
> a look at the email.
>

Can you give me an example of such tool? So I can put these data in the
commit description. I have to rebase this anyway as more changes got
merged so it might be a good idea to add more info about how this won't
make actualy changes.

> Konrad
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof

-- 
	Ansuel