yes, it is more about sort the list using .data and .compatible. key
much better if it we keep this as suggested by Frank,
static const struct of_device_id ls_pcie_ep_of_match[] = {
+ { .compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls1_ep_drvdata },
{ .compatible = "fsl,ls1046a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls1_ep_drvdata },
{ .compatible = "fsl,ls1088a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls2_ep_drvdata },
Thanks,
Alok
On 2/9/2023 3:53 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 04:20:21PM +0000, Frank Li wrote:
Subject: Re: [External] : RE: [EXT] [PATCH v2 1/1] PCI: layerscape: Add EP
mode support for ls1028a
{ .compatible = "fsl,ls1046a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls1_ep_drvdata },
+ { .compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls1_ep_drvdata },
{ .compatible = "fsl,ls1088a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls2_ep_drvdata },
can it be like this for better readability. ?
It is just chip name and follow name conversion, which already
upstreamed and documented.
Why do you think it not is good readability?
I thought maybe ALOK's point was to sort the list, which does make a
lot of sense. But if you want to sort by the .data member, I would
think you would make .compatible a secondary sort key, which means
ls1028a would come before ls1046a, so you would end up with this
instead:
static const struct of_device_id ls_pcie_ep_of_match[] = {
+ { .compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls1_ep_drvdata },
{ .compatible = "fsl,ls1046a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls1_ep_drvdata },
{ .compatible = "fsl,ls1088a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls2_ep_drvdata },
{ .compatible = "fsl,ls2088a-pcie-ep", .data = &ls2_ep_drvdata },
{ .compatible = "fsl,lx2160ar2-pcie-ep", .data = &lx2_ep_drvdata },
{ },
};
