Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <fa548aa4-6d17-0981-227a-bed6aedcb34f@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 25 Apr 2023 10:22:06 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.10.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sa8155p-adp: Make -cells decimal
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, agross@kernel.org,
        andersson@kernel.org, konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230421205512.339850-1-ahalaney@redhat.com>
 <20230421205512.339850-2-ahalaney@redhat.com>
 <abd106b1-6650-6a7c-1c8b-3609e47b0161@linaro.org>
 <20230424143857.373kjvi42c7acsbp@halaney-x13s>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230424143857.373kjvi42c7acsbp@halaney-x13s>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 24/04/2023 16:38, Andrew Halaney wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 09:21:45AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 21/04/2023 22:55, Andrew Halaney wrote:
>>> The property logically makes sense in decimal, and is the standard used
>>> elsewhere.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes since v2:
>>>     * Collect tags
>>> Changes since v1:
>>>     * New patch (Konrad)
>>
>> Doing such changes per one board will be a lot of churn...
>>
> 
> Agreed, are you suggesting I drop this patch (and if we do this sort of
> cleanup to do it in bulk)? Sorry, not entirely sure I am picking up what
> that comment is implying.

Yes, I suggest to fix all Qualcomm arm64 boards with one patch. There
are just few more occurrences of this. It's also pure cleanup, no
functional change.

> 
> Personally, I'd prefer to keeping that patch as this series is trying to
> clean up the particular ethernet node.. but if the purpose of the series
> was just to clean -cells up then I'd go with the bulk approach.
> 
> So as is, I'm going to leave it like so unless you have specific advice
> against doing so.

Best regards,
Krzysztof