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]

Message-ID: <a4c805c3-8d78-98bd-40be-204fe98e6153@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 13:14:07 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Cc:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.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 19/07/2022 10:57, Christian Marangi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 12:56:18PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 19/07/2022 10:19, Christian Marangi wrote:
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> scripts/dtc/dtx_diff
>> fdtdump + diff
>>
>> There should be an empty diff from at least one of methods above. If you
>> have a difference, I am not sure how can we verify this.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> 
> This [1] is the output of dtx_diff.
> The file diff is just phanle change that are related to the node order.
> 
> Seems a nice way to verify if the shuffle didn't drop any node.

Therefore run the second method - fdtdump.

Best regards,
Krzysztof