On 2023-01-08 23:11:13, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > Different entries into the catalog were added quite randomly. Enforce > the sorting order of some kind. It is not alphabetic to prevent the > patch from growing uncontrollably. Why not sort these chronologically based on DPU hardware revision in the match table at the end of this file? Regardless, this patch is going to make it hard to properly rebase DPU additions; see for example patch 4/8 and 5/8 in my second round of DSC fixes. At the same time we should find a solution to the wishy-washy reuse of structs and defines, which may appear the same initially but become mismatched as more features are added (see how I had to split out multiple of these in the INTF TE enablement series). > Thus SDM comes before SC and SM > platforms and QCM is kept as the last one. There are no functional > changes in this patch. > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Yes, I hate such mass-moves too. However the entries in this file are > slowly becoming uncontrollable. Let's enforce some order now (while it's > late already, but not _that_ late). I agree that something should happen, contributing to this file is unnecessarily tough. - Marijn
