On 01/11/2024 09:17, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 31/10/2024 16:42, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
On 11/10/2024 15:29, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
How do you imagine writing drivers and request items by order (not by
name) if the order is different in each flavor?
I don't think I'd be much in favour of relying on declaration order in
the dts, favouring names to find resources instead, tbh.
The 8250 has regs that sort by address and name in the same order. For
8280xp we preferred sort by address and you're right the interrupt
sorting isn't consistent.
However the latest applied dts for CAMSS is sort by address/irq not sort
by reg-name irq-name.
Unless its a NAK from yourself and Rob, that would certainly be my
preference for any _new_ additions subsequent.
It's not a NAK as long you keep the same order in new bindings, which I
think it is not possible. I repeat myself: there is no rule/style that
list should be ordered by values, but there is a rule that all devices
from the same family should have the same order of items in the list. I
don't think it is achievable with your approach - sorting by value.
Grand.
I'm happy enough to sort by IP alpha TBH.
---
bod
