On 24-03-22, 11:55, Kuldeep Singh wrote: > Fixed order of values is important in case of properties like > compatibles etc. In case of dma-names, yes order shouldn't matter here. > > This patch is more of appeasing dtbs_check warning rather than fixing > something. Exactly my point. We have seen similar type of issues with other tools, like coccinelle, earlier and such patches were rejected as the kernel was just fine and tooling needs to be fixed. > It's safe to go with this patch. > I am not sure if there's a provision to exclude dma-names from fix > ordering checks. Rob can help here in providing better insights. -- viresh
