On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 01:29:19PM +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 1/11/24 12:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > Tidy up ACPI ID table: > > - sort entries alphabetically for better maintenance > > Not a fan of alphabetical order just for the sake of it. It's not for the sake of it, that makes easier to see what's going on with the IDs. It's not the first time I stumbled over (unsorted) ID list and questioning what the ID belongs to (vendor wise) and how many of them from the same vendor and how many of them are invalid. > In this case, it seems to me more useful to keep different > vendors IDs together. Agree, but also note, alphabetical order roughly gives the different vendor IDs together with also grouping PNP/ACPI/invalid ACPI IDs. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
