[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f3184805-3617-4b46-be23-70cebcf27207@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 10:22:02 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Ayush Singh <ayush@...gleboard.org>,
Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree-compiler@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] dt-bindings: Add support for export-symbols node
On 17/08/2025 10:18, Ayush Singh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hardware:
>>>> i2c0 from SoC --------- connector 1, I2C A signals
>>>> i2c1 from SoC --------- connector 1, I2C B signals
>>>>
>>>> connector1 {
>>>> export-symbols {
>>>> i2c_a = <&i2c0>;
>>>> i2c_b = <&i2c1>;
>>>> };
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> In order to avoid the coding style issue, this could be replace
>>>> with:
>>>> connector1 {
>>>> export-symbols {
>>>> symbol-names = "i2c_a", "i2c_b";
>>>> symbols = <&i2c0>, <&i2c1>;
>>>> };
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> Krzysztof, Rob, do you think this could be accepted ?
>>>>
>>>> Ayush, David, do you thing this could be easily implemented in fdtoverlay ?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Hervé
>>>>
>>> Well, it is possible.
>>>
>>> However, on connectors like pb2 header, there will be 50-100 export
>>> symbols. So it will start becoming difficult to maintain.
>>
>> And the first syntax solves this how? I don't see the practical difference.
>
>
> Well, I was more worried about matching which phandle belongs to which
> symbol easily. Let us assume that 2 symbols will be in each line (after
> accounting for the indention and 80 char limit) and we have 70 symbols,
> so 35 lines. To check which phandle belongs to the 2nd symbol on line
> 25th line of symbol-names, well, you would at the best case need to
> have something like relative line numbers in your editor. Then you know
> that the 35th line from the current one is where you need to look.
>
> In the current syntax, the symbol name and phandle are on the same line.
> So well, easy to see which symbols refers to which phandle.
OK, that's valid point. Any ideas how to solve it without introducing
underscores for properties?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists