Am Samstag, 1. März 2025, 11:32:06 MEZ schrieb Patrick Wildt: > On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 12:38:40AM +0100, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > Hi Patrick, > > > > Am Montag, 17. Februar 2025, 21:22:28 MEZ schrieb Patrick Wildt: > > > MNT Reform 2 is an open source laptop with replaceable CPU modules, > > > including a version with the RK3588-based MNT RCORE[1], which is based > > > on Firefly's iCore-3588Q SoM: > > > > > > - Rockchip RK3588 > > > - Quad A76 and Quad A55 CPU > > > - 6 TOPS NPU > > > - up to 32GB LPDDR4x RAM > > > - SD Card slot > > > - Gigabit ethernet port > > > - HDMI port > > > - 2x mPCIe ports for WiFi or NVMe > > > - 3x USB 3.0 Type-A HOST port > > > > > > [1] https://shop.mntre.com/products/mnt-reform > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas F. Hartmann <lukas@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Patrick Wildt <patrick@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > bureaucracy question, what is Lukas' relationship with the patch? > > Two options: > > (1) Lukas initially developed the patch, then the "From:" should be > > set accordingly > > (2) Both of you developed it together, then we should have a > > Co-Developed-by: Lukas F. Hartmann <lukas@xxxxxxxxx> > > up there > > > > Thanks, will send a v5 with Co-developed-by tag added! :) > > > > > Some more style things below... > > > > Are there further execptions to the alphabetical rule? For regulators > I often see min before max, which I think makes sense to understand > the range but isn't technically alphabetical. The same for pinctrl-0 > and pinctrl-names. The "preferred" rules are in [0], and in recent times I've come to appreciate not needing to explain exceptions ;-) . But I do see them as guidelines, especially in a leaf-dt (for a device) concessions are possible. So yes, I can definitly see min before max as beneficial and if you want to sort that way, that is fine by me Heiko [0] https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dts-coding-style.rst#n112
