Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753481AbaKRH4w (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Nov 2014 02:56:52 -0500 Received: from mail-bn1on0054.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([157.56.110.54]:5344 "EHLO na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752933AbaKRH4u (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Nov 2014 02:56:50 -0500 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 08:56:29 +0100 From: Michal Simek User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Crosthwaite , =?UTF-8?B?U8O2cmVuIA==?= =?UTF-8?B?QnJpbmttYW5u?= CC: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= , Michal Simek , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Olof Johansson , Arnd Bergmann , Mark Rutland , Josh Cartwright , Michal Simek , Russell King , Pawel Moll , Ian Campbell , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Rob Herring , Kumar Gala , Steffen Trumtrar Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] ARM: zynq: DT: Add OCM controller node References: <0a88d52b5e71fb220ca619180ec9ca746edad2b1.1415962281.git.michal.simek@xilinx.com> <546881CA.2020801@suse.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-RCIS-Action: ALLOW X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1224-7.5.0.1018-21112.002 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes Message-ID: X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:62.221.5.235;CTRY:GB;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(438002)(189002)(51704005)(377424004)(377454003)(164054003)(199003)(479174003)(24454002)(33646002)(106466001)(19580405001)(120916001)(65956001)(92566001)(19580395003)(65806001)(6806004)(44976005)(104016003)(107046002)(102836001)(77156002)(62966003)(99396003)(31966008)(54356999)(74316001)(50986999)(76176999)(108616004)(87936001)(50466002)(64126003)(23676002)(20776003)(86362001)(21056001)(95666004)(83506001)(4396001)(46102003)(47776003)(64706001)(93886004)(65826006)(107986001)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BN1BFFO11HUB001;H:xir-pvapsmtpgw01;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:unknown-62-221-5-235.ipspace.xilinx.com;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN1BFFO11HUB001; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN1BFFO11HUB001; X-Forefront-PRVS: 039975700A Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 62.221.5.235) smtp.mailfrom=michal.simek@xilinx.com; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN1BFFO11HUB001; X-OriginatorOrg: xilinx.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/17/2014 12:00 AM, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Sören Brinkmann > wrote: >> On Sun, 2014-11-16 at 11:51AM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote: >>> Hi Michal, >>> >>> Am 14.11.2014 um 11:52 schrieb Michal Simek: >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >>>> index ce2ef5bec4f2..e217fb1c1169 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >>>> @@ -150,6 +150,13 @@ >>>> reg = <0xf8006000 0x1000>; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> + ocmc: memory-controller@f800c000 { >>>> + compatible = "xlnx,zynq-ocmc-1.0"; >>>> + interrupt-parent = <&intc>; >>>> + interrupts = <0 3 4>; >>>> + reg = <0xf800c000 0x1000>; >>>> + }; >>>> + >>>> uart0: serial@e0000000 { >>>> compatible = "xlnx,xuartps", "cdns,uart-r1p8"; >>>> status = "disabled"; >>> >>> Not directly related to this patch: As one can see here, the node order >>> is quite a mess... According to Olof, nodes should be ordered by unit >>> address, whereas here some but not all seem ordered by node name. Would >>> you welcome a cleanup patch, or can you fix that yourself? >> >> I wouldn't say it's a mess, just a different property to sort the nodes >> by. For humans reading the DT, searching for nodes, alphabetical order >> helps finding the right node, IMHO. > > I do generally find myself asking "whats that thing at that address" > more than I find myself asking the "wheres that piece of hardware" so > Andreas' sorting scheme makes more sense to me. Vertically scanning a > DT to give yourself an overview of the system level address map is > good too. Wheras alphabetic sorting doesn't mean to much. IMHO the reason why we have names in DT is that it is easily to read/understand them that's why name sorting seems to me more reasonable. Something like machine code and assembler - asm is also sorted by names not by opcode. Is this strict rule? Thanks, Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/