On 19.07.2022 12:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 19/07/2022 10:19, Christian Marangi wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 12:22:24PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 19.07.2022 12:16, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 19/07/2022 11:59, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 at 12:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski >>>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 18/07/2022 17:38, Christian Marangi wrote: >>>>>>> Reorganize node order and sort them by address. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This was picked from for-next qcom branch [1]. Reorganize dtsi as requested. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/qcom/linux.git/?h=for-next >>>>>> >>>>>> If this is picked by qcom branch, no need to resend it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't see value in such reshuffle. Reviewing is not possible and you >>>>>> did not mention tests (results should be equal). >>>>> >>>>> The value is usual for all the cleanups: make it follow the >>>>> established practice. >>>> >>>> Are you sure this is established practice? >>> Yes. >>> >>> New DTSI files (see SC8280XP, >>>> sm8450 although sc7280 looked ordered) do not always follow it, so why >>>> imposing it for existing code? >>> Perhaps it slipped through review.. Partially my bad. >>> >>> >>> Such reshuffle can cause conflicts thus >>>> stops parallel development. Review is close to impossible... >>> Almost any addition or removal also causes conflicts, because git is >>> not as smart as we would like it to be. If the commit is structured >>> properly (i.e. it *only* changes the order and nothing else), >>> decompiling the dtbs before and after applying it and using a tool >>> like meld that can find similar chunks of text at different offsets >>> review is definitely possible, though not very pleasant (you can't >>> just diff them, as order is preserved & phandles change due to that) >>> as you have to look at it manually and can't tell much by just taking >>> a look at the email. >>> >> >> Can you give me an example of such tool? So I can put these data in the >> commit description. I have to rebase this anyway as more changes got >> merged so it might be a good idea to add more info about how this won't >> make actualy changes. >> > > scripts/dtc/dtx_diff > fdtdump + diff Thanks for sharing this.. way better than my crude method.. Konrad > > There should be an empty diff from at least one of methods above. If you > have a difference, I am not sure how can we verify this. > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
