Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Slightly improve hardware description of Pine64 RockPro64

[Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>]

On 2025-03-04 07:44, Dragan Simic wrote:
> On 2025-03-03 23:36, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>> On Sun, 02 Mar 2025 19:48:02 +0100, Dragan Simic wrote:
>>> This is a small series that introduces small improvements to the way
>>> Pine64 RockPro64 [1] single-board-computer is described in the DT 
>>> files.
>>> This applies to both production-run revisions of the RockPro64.
>>> 
>>> The introduced improvements boil down to eliminating some warnings 
>>> from
>>> the kernel log, by adding a previously undefined regulator and by 
>>> adding
>>> some previously missing references to the regulators.
>>> 
>>> [...]
>> 
>> Applied, thanks!
>> 
>> [1/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd HDMI supplies to RockPro64 board 
>> dtsi
>>       commit: bd1c959f37f384b477f51572331b0dc828bd009a
>> [2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add missing PCIe supplies to RockPro64 
>> board dtsi
>>       commit: 64ef4a4320e7aa3f0f267e01f170f52b90bf0b1b
>> 
>> I've moved the pcie12v supply up one line.
>> While in a mathematical sense it's true 12 > 3.3, we're sorting
>> alphabetical, so it's 1?? < 3?? .
>> 
>> And yes I sympathize with 3.3 < 12, but also have come to appreciate 
>> not
>> having overly many special cases :-)
> 
> Great, thanks! :)
> 
> I'm fine with the alphabetical ordering, albeit with some caveats
> described below, but the following part of the patch description
> should also be removed, if possible, so the patch description fully
> matches the introduced changes:
> 
>   Shuffle and reorder the "vpcie*-supply" properties a bit, so they're 
> sorted
>   alphanumerically, which is a bit more logical and more useful than 
> having
>   these properties listed in their strict alphabetical order.
> 
> Admittedly, the patch itself indeed looks nicer [1] with the
> alphabetical ordering, :) (which is quasi-alphabetical, actually,
> please see below) but it might be better to have the DT guidelines
> adjusted to specify alphanumerical ordering as well.  Even ls(1)
> can sort filenames alphanumerically, with its "-v" option that
> performs "natural sort of (version) numbers within text". [2]
> 
> The real trouble is that, if we were to apply the alphabetical
> ordering strictly, we'd end up with the following order of node
> properties in which 12 is before 1.8 and 3.3, which IMHO doesn't
> make much sense:
> 
>   vpcie0v9-supply = <&vcca_0v9>;
>   vpcie12v-supply = <&vcc12v_dcin>;
>   vpcie1v8-supply = <&vcca_1v8>;
>   vpcie3v3-supply = <&vcc3v3_pcie>;
> 
> I'm hoping you'll agree that specifying alphanumerical ordering
> for the properties in the DTS coding style is the way to go, just
> like it's already specified for the ordering of the nodes.  I'll
> go ahead and submit an appropriate patch for the DT guidelines.
> 
> [1] 
> https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mmind/linux-rockchip.git/commit/?id=64ef4a4320e7aa3f0f267e01f170f52b90bf0b1b
> [2] https://man.archlinux.org/man/ls.1.en#v

For future reference and for anyone interested, here's a link to
the above-mentioned DTS coding style patch:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/09d6f2fc111b3d6e58987336944f93ec36b65118.1741071107.git.dsimic@manjaro.org/T/#u