On Monday, July 18, 2016 10:11:55 AM CEST Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon 18 Jul 00:44 PDT 2016, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 17, 2016 8:44:01 PM CEST Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > Ok, then how about this instead:
> >
> > /smd/rpm/rpm_requests/pm8841-regulators {
>
> The problem I have with this is that in the dtsi we have properties and
> other nodes under each one of these, hence we end up with completely
> different overall structure depending on if I look in the dtsi or the
> dts.
>
> The problem I have with it in the dts is that we have properties and
> nodes under "smd" and "rpm_requests". So siblings are no longer grouped
> together.
>
>
> I have a hard time finding my way through flattened trees, often spread out
> over multiple files, that I need to puzzle together in my head. Perhaps
> there are better ways to keep this comprehensible, without maintaining
> the structure.
>
> > s1 {
> > regulator-min-microvolt = <675000>;
> > regulator-max-microvolt = <1050000>;
> > };
> >
> > ...
> > };
> >
> > That avoids the ridiculous intendation level but uses no labels.
> >
>
> I do share your dislike of the indentation level.
>
>
> I do have a few other concerns about style and scalability in other
> places. How about we follow how I've done this in the other files for
> now (i.e. keep the structure of the patch as is) and sit down at LAS16
> to discuss what to do about this?
Fair enough, let's do that for now.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
