Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: rename and sort the rk356x usb2
 phy handles
From:   Piotr Oniszczuk <piotr.oniszczuk@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMdYzYpkXdXDST+N8dEn7UvibXmytwNeJ+KZ9bn9Oq+RJuSaeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:23:18 +0100
Cc:     "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
        Nicolas Frattaroli <frattaroli.nicolas@gmail.com>,
        Liang Chen <cl@rock-chips.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FBB7C392-C5E0-4E34-AC17-5323414623F5@gmail.com>
References: <20220127190456.2195527-1-michael.riesch@wolfvision.net>
 <CAMdYzYpkXdXDST+N8dEn7UvibXmytwNeJ+KZ9bn9Oq+RJuSaeQ@mail.gmail.com>
To:     Peter Geis <pgwipeout@gmail.com>,
        Michael Riesch <michael.riesch@wolfvision.net>
Precedence: bulk


>=20
> Good Evening,
>=20
> While I'm not against this idea, my main concern still stands.
> I spent a great deal of thought on this, and decided to go the route I
> did to maintain consistency with previous generations.
> As such, I see one of three paths here:
> - Pull this patch only and depart rk356x from previous SoCs.
> - Do the same for previous SoCs to maintain consistency.
> - Drop this patch to maintain consistency with previous SoCs.
>=20
> I ask that others weigh in here, as offline discussion has produced
> mixed results already.

just pure user perspective

(who spent last weeks considerable time to develop DT for rk3566 tvbox. =
99% of my work was by reading/learning from other boards existing DT's. =
Any inconsistencies in DTs makes work for such ppl like me much more =
harder):

For option 1 - i don't see value
For option 2 - what is reward for extra work needs to be done on all =
other SoCs?

so option 3 seems to be natural choice...

in other words:

for me:
option 1 brings practically zero value + increased inconsistency.
option 2: extra work - but consistency is like in option 3 (so where is =
value?)

so option 3 offers the same consistency - but without extra work...
=20
just my 0.02$

=20=