Am Sonntag, 30. Januar 2022, 10:56:08 CET schrieb Michael Riesch: > Hello Heiko, > > On 1/29/22 16:28, Heiko Stübner wrote: > > Am Samstag, 29. Januar 2022, 10:59:32 CET schrieb Michael Riesch: > >> Hello Peter and Piotr, > >> > >> On 1/29/22 10:23, Piotr Oniszczuk wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Good Evening, > >>>> > >>>> While I'm not against this idea, my main concern still stands. > >>>> I spent a great deal of thought on this, and decided to go the route I > >>>> did to maintain consistency with previous generations. > >>>> As such, I see one of three paths here: > >>>> - Pull this patch only and depart rk356x from previous SoCs. > >>>> - Do the same for previous SoCs to maintain consistency. > >>>> - Drop this patch to maintain consistency with previous SoCs. > >>>> > >>>> I ask that others weigh in here, as offline discussion has produced > >>>> mixed results already. > >>> > >>> just pure user perspective > >>> > >>> (who spent last weeks considerable time to develop DT for rk3566 tvbox. 99% of my work was by reading/learning from other boards existing DT's. Any inconsistencies in DTs makes work for such ppl like me much more harder): > >>> > >>> For option 1 - i don't see value > >>> For option 2 - what is reward for extra work needs to be done on all other SoCs? > >>> > >>> so option 3 seems to be natural choice... > >>> > >>> in other words: > >>> > >>> for me: > >>> option 1 brings practically zero value + increased inconsistency. > >>> option 2: extra work - but consistency is like in option 3 (so where is value?) > >>> > >>> so option 3 offers the same consistency - but without extra work... > >>> > >>> just my 0.02$ > >> > >> Of course this change is purely cosmetic and it is reasonable to ask for > >> the practical value. It is just that technically the quartz64 dts is not > >> sorted alphabetically at the moment. The u2phy* nodes should be but > >> before the uart* nodes to follow the convention. On the other hand, it > >> may be nice to have the usb2 phys and controllers grouped in the dts. > >> The proposed renaming would allow all the mentioned nodes sorted > >> alphabetically and grouped logically. > >> > >> Therefore I had option 1 in mind. I don't see any dependencies between > >> the different SoCs and think we can make a fresh start here. > > > > correct :-) . > > > > I do see each SoC individually and while I try to have people follow some > > styling guidelines everywhere (ordering of properties, ordering of nodes) > > I don't really want people to fear what some other SoC has done before. > > > > But even these rules evolve sometimes, when something seems to work > > better than before. > > > > We have nowadays 9 years of Rockchip SoC history in the kernel. > > Thanks to general dt-binding conventions most nodes have specific > > names anyway (mmc@... etc), but for example trying to rename stuff > > in older SoCs that has worked for years now is for one error-prone > > as Michael pointed out, but also introduces unnecessary churn, > > when these old SoCs (thinking of rk3188, rk3288 and friends but also things > > like the rk3368) are essentially "finished" and most likely won't see that > > much additional support for stuff added. > > So... may I take it that you are going to apply the patches in this series? that was the intention behind that "wall of text" :-D Heiko > Or should I switch to option 3 and re-submit? > > Thanks and best regards, > Michael > > > > > > > Heiko > > > > > >> Option 2 is not really feasible, we would almost definitely break > >> something existent. > >> > >> Option 3 is feasible, of course. However, I would sort the nodes > >> alphabetically (u2phy*, then uart*, then usb*). Works for me as well, > >> although it is not that nice IMHO. > >> > >> Since many boards with the RK3566 and RK3568 will pop up in near future > >> we should do the change right now (if we want to do it), as of course > >> all the board files need to be changed. Therefore I wanted to bring this > >> matter up now. Let's agree on something and move on. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Michael > >> > > > > > > > > >
