linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: imx8mn-var-som: reorder reg properties after compatible strings

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: <c81b364e-a36e-4f56-b2c4-d4ca889281ed@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 7 Nov 2023 17:37:44 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@...ovil.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
        Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@...onoff.com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: imx8mn-var-som: reorder reg properties after
 compatible strings

On 07/11/2023 17:28, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 17:19:20 +0100
> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 07/11/2023 17:01, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
>>> From: Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@...onoff.com>
>>>
>>> Move reg nodes after the compatible string, to follow DT conventions.
>>
>> This is a bit of churn... like patches for checkpatch. But unlike
>> checkpatch, it's not even documented.
> 
> Hi,
> I do not really understand your point or if I must change
> something...
> 
> But looking at a lot of dts, the reg property is always following the
> compatible string, so I assumed it was an undocumented convention or
> best practice...
> 

Patches fixing only checkpatch --strict are usually welcomed only in
staging. But even there no one wants to deal with one patch changing one
style issue in one file.

You are doing the same, outside of staging, but relying on undocumented
practice. Such patches are unnecessary churn. Documenting the practice
and fixing entire subsystems or groups of devices would be welcomed.
Fixing line by line some style issue is just effort for maintainers.

Best regards,
Krzysztof