From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew McClintock Subject: Re: [PATCH] When dumping from file system show results in sane order Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:41:50 -0500 Message-ID: <1286844110.1507.4.camel@mattsm-VirtualBox> References: <1286305641-23388-1-git-send-email-msm@freescale.com> <20101011235546.GB22383@yookeroo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20101011235546.GB22383@yookeroo> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: David Gibson Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 10:55 +1100, David Gibson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 02:07:21PM -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote: > > Currently, when we run the following > > > > $> dtc -I fs -O dts /proc/device-tree > > > > We get the output in a "reverse order", this patch will reverse that > > output order and should resemble your initial device more closely > > Reverse order from what? Directory entries are unordered for most > intents and purposes - there's no guarantee that readdir() will return > entries in a consistent order, and behaviour in practice will vary > from one filesystem to another. Ok, maybe I should word it as now ordered. =) > > Your patch doesn't reverse the order - it sorts the items. If that's > what you actually want, then my general dtdiff and sorting patch will > serve you better, as Grant suggests. > Yep, I concur your version is better and I would like to see that accepted for my own reasons. Cheers, Matthew