Re: [PATCH v1 03/25] arm64: dts: colibri-imx8x: Sort properties

[Francesco Dolcini <francesco@dolcini.it>]

On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 04:17:35PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 01:19:13PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > Hello Krzysztof, first thanks for your review.
> > 
> > Let's try to get some clarity on this with the help of Shawn.
> > 
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 01:57:38PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 08/03/2023 13:52, Philippe Schenker wrote:
> > > > From: Philippe Schenker <philippe.schenker@toradex.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Sort properties according to the following order and inside these
> > > > alphabetically.
> > > > 
> > > > 1. compatible
> > > > 2. reg
> > > > 3. standard properties
> > > > 4. specific properties
> > > > 5. status
> > > 
> > > Is this approved coding style for IMX DTS?
> > 
> > I 100% understand your concerns here.
> > 
> > With that said let me try to briefly explain the reasoning here, in
> > various threads we were asked in the past to move node around based on
> > some not 100% defined rules [0][1].
> > 
> > On Sun, 2023-01-29 at 11:19 +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > >> +&usbotg1 {
> > >> +	adp-disable;
> > >> +	ci-disable-lpm;
> > >> +	hnp-disable;
> > >> +	over-current-active-low;
> > >> +	pinctrl-names = "default";
> > >> +	pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_usbotg1>;
> > >
> > >We generally want to put such generic properties before device specific
> > >ones.
> > 
> > In addition to that we find convenient to have properties sorted
> > alphabetically when no other rule is available, it just prevents any
> > kind of discussion, minimize merge conflicts and make comparing files
> > easier.
> > 
> > I also agree that the difference between "generic"/"specific" is fuzzy
> > at best.
> > 
> > With all that said ...
> > 
> > Shawn: What should we do? We can of course avoid any kind of re-ordering
> > from now on.
> 
> We are practically asking for 1, 2 and 5 for i.MX DTS files, but pretty
> flexible for the rest.
> 
> > I am fine to be very pragmatic here, no-reordering on existing DTS
> > files, newly added DTS files we discuss whatever is the reasoning of the
> > reviewer/maintainer on a case-by-case basis.
> 
> Sounds good to me!  While I personally like your ordering, I do not want
> it to churn the existing DTS files.

Agreed.

> 
> I'm happy to take this patch as a special case though :)

Philippe just rebased all the stuff getting rid of the sort commit :-)
No special case needed, he will send an updated series in a hour.

Thanks a lot,
Francesco