Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:28:49 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Kuldeep Singh <singh.kuldeep87k@gmail.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>,
        Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.linux.kernel@gmail.com>, soc@kernel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: spear13xx: Update SPI dma properties
Message-ID: <20220325015849.sazvlevnvdqj5z42@vireshk-i7>
References: <20220323175920.93155-1-singh.kuldeep87k@gmail.com>
 <20220324023904.h2qfxzxlznggbsyr@vireshk-i7>
 <20220324062547.GA15504@9a2d8922b8f1>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220324062547.GA15504@9a2d8922b8f1>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Precedence: bulk

On 24-03-22, 11:55, Kuldeep Singh wrote:
> Fixed order of values is important in case of properties like
> compatibles etc. In case of dma-names, yes order shouldn't matter here.
> 
> This patch is more of appeasing dtbs_check warning rather than fixing
> something.

Exactly my point. We have seen similar type of issues with other tools, like
coccinelle, earlier and such patches were rejected as the kernel was just fine
and tooling needs to be fixed.

> It's safe to go with this patch.
> I am not sure if there's a provision to exclude dma-names from fix
> ordering checks. Rob can help here in providing better insights.

-- 
viresh