From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51AEE184E; Fri, 7 Mar 2025 12:54:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741352091; cv=none; b=QAsSukeKXYnOmZF2g0op6omO9K2/4EiNQMqN8KyMtWkKZfBNXpR7yGl0itmC00KljWbKcv/eu1iN5qX/PCgNTppiKShwPD3LME5EAgzcsj86ehdhnyluZe2YFLqkhuB/nIk4hI11RM5yX6E29FEkvJpPTjT6j07FVleJftWCI+E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741352091; c=relaxed/simple; bh=t98L1cJyPlqfqZqXYXCrH5GnatMIVTQhNMPpuL4im/E=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=Ecgdq1mAZEJ9ebIAbrF3CpkWeC/FhZAtyk2sGswfruqDMSh/HzEKX1GLmXg289gG878aarvQzhBcS2Y9sP8BDWJc1R9/as5HMj91Ys6F/TpZEy5y4mWsGiMXrA2QE1BlD58r1Gah1lEJp7PZIA7RNkxyr6gijpqtXhS6wz++dOA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=WMMJhBhR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="WMMJhBhR" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1741352085; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=U1IBEXO1K0l5EuPKHFBzRStL3WgZjK6CIvw+VolQFd4=; b=WMMJhBhRudn8CU78xN2jLApEoIVy9rZlY2pmDnhr2zeXZBVlzcEU83m0I/zzoJSHS3d62F c5urEaK+q7wOlW8MGfT+FDW49jLTGYxbXKZ7kMP5/XKSeWzcz030m0IUu2S2X0lLOYpeV4 MLi9r5gzwPwWB0f9zz0BnHOS8TPEdMUHXVF3NEGVYvXmF4GPiZK7whf2iMgVyby45R5mR1 LDp4gPWKA4YRH7hCyp6fBmAkfeEyUWxw3oBAHlVtWegLnb8l4/jrrRbTZU4VGNgBSleLwJ PxLF44RtB23hX5Buh4Quo/YLk2TgDZlmljoElh9oUikWqCPIJJkhv5iG+Ak1aQ== Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2025 13:54:45 +0100 From: Dragan Simic To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: robh@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, heiko@sntech.de, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] docs: dt-bindings: Specify ordering for properties within groups In-Reply-To: References: <7276139ea1f4a5f4db48c77f536a3638492e6c2f.1741321984.git.dsimic@manjaro.org> <20250307-logical-nimble-okapi-3ba081@krzk-bin> <0df01d9863f72df3bebff1868f010954@manjaro.org> Message-ID: <02600009a6b478c43822239d6957dff8@manjaro.org> X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org On 2025-03-07 13:41, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 07/03/2025 10:50, Dragan Simic wrote: >>>> Applying strict alpha-numerical ordering can result in property >>>> lists >>>> that >>>> are suboptimal from the usability standpoint. For the provided >>>> example, >>>> which stems from a real-world DT, [2][3][4] applying strict >>>> alpha-numerical >>>> ordering produces the following undesirable result: >>> >>> BTW, your entire commit msg still has incorrect wrapping. Please use >>> standard editors which understand Git commit msg style (which I >>> believe >>> is equal to Linux submitting patches). >> >> Sorry, but what makes the wrapping wrong? I wrap patch descriptions >> at or well before 78 columns, which I belive is the desired way to do >> so. The longest line in this patch description is 77 characters long, >> which is still below 78 characters. > > Because it is not correct. Read submitting patches. Run checkpatch. Here's what scripts/checkpatch.pl returns: WARNING: Prefer a maximum 75 chars per line (possible unwrapped commit description?) #10: the property names can result in more logical and more usable property lists, total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 26 lines checked So, it's just a warning, and if I wrap that single line before column 77, checkpatch.pl stops complaining. Thus, your earlier broad statement that "your entire commit msg still has incorrect wrapping" is simply wrong. >> Also, please note that I don't "just use" some random editor, but I >> use >> a highly customized Vim setup, in which I over time wrote about 46 KB >> of Vimscript code in my ~/.vimrc, all by hand. I've even contributed >> smaller patches to Vim. > > OK, so not random, but incorrectly configured. Different tools, same > result. Could you, please let me know your thoughts about the actual contents of the patch, regarding the settlement that I proposed in my previous response?