From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-189.mta1.migadu.com (out-189.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E082F1372 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:58:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.189 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751101085; cv=none; b=UDea6DDY19hijVf/CtDLZuu6YSSNnFZ04Jj7ZatW0g6C3UrRRQ7QJYpL98BMtkp3ArJsdgw7PLZi8yKK1Jo2vcnVian7/wdu9cc+XNwuTSqwLQRYyWbgmapE3744DPtYrIK7DUAAX3Tc+0WEYkGunyn54VT5foAadd7/xz+eSQY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751101085; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pLzUu12WEaIgtCdO2e0vn7AW2eyYnzZNKQi/VqabhiM=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Cc:Subject:From:To: References:In-Reply-To; b=f82jPSNu1fzaFot3lSmWSqX9fTdbiNs+wuGVcxnspC9NoawM70lDx7bIy/qDnFTs8iRq7oqnJKJNS35ppN4AT22QSoKFE/IvS6HXVUJiSwCnmfvkPMKnWdv/skHGgXKdLb19qve819DDAi1Hpvnj+4Kmf0MSrA61SxJyYxtNTXs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=cknow.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cknow.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cknow.org header.i=@cknow.org header.b=ROENJZTI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.189 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=cknow.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cknow.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cknow.org header.i=@cknow.org header.b="ROENJZTI" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cknow.org; s=key1; t=1751101070; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ybqsyqEQtaTyGQvk+BFdCF7y271RgdQMonWszxYB88c=; b=ROENJZTIjZyoCI9g2NPJUEtCzQMHCjP4pthou6YG3P6yiZ2a1ek19Xv1QSzBHZzkaWgQAm 3xmFVpxPyobZosVJygZtNI5iEPcIz/nFt5Mi1Gc0t8WkooJHZ4VZCjxfnlm2XBe0aAKk6J 4umnJnAB61UfIauxFGLuU7SsDfGL6YYM6ROHv/9Ge7Gvz1h2GptoLGsLO7TiXmULdPMdsC d9ksbrHAIcJaOT53g1FN6EWXLzMCU+ziHi9IXhoOw7M1fBsJ33315yDrQI5J8nUc+uOQI0 2HVtYevIo0/JXHjMDXN9et/v3aON1lm6QZ90GzwsA4oYmvanj77wP183v7Bpkw== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=45ff3aaff99b43270ac8aa38352e1e585a3b95bead335ff4d3af9d1accaf; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 10:57:29 +0200 Message-Id: Cc: "Dragan Simic" , "Johan Jonker" , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] arm64: dts: rockchip: Refactor DSI nodes on rk3399 boards X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: "Diederik de Haas" To: =?utf-8?q?Heiko_St=C3=BCbner?= , "Quentin Schulz" , "Rob Herring" , "Krzysztof Kozlowski" , "Conor Dooley" References: <20250627152645.740981-1-didi.debian@cknow.org> <5121698.88bMQJbFj6@diego> In-Reply-To: <5121698.88bMQJbFj6@diego> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT --45ff3aaff99b43270ac8aa38352e1e585a3b95bead335ff4d3af9d1accaf Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Heiko & Quentin, On Fri Jun 27, 2025 at 8:25 PM CEST, Heiko St=C3=BCbner wrote: > Am Freitag, 27. Juni 2025, 18:52:08 Mitteleurop=C3=A4ische Sommerzeit sch= rieb Diederik de Haas: >> On Fri Jun 27, 2025 at 6:10 PM CEST, Quentin Schulz wrote: >> > On 6/27/25 5:16 PM, Diederik de Haas wrote: >> >> The #address-cells and #size-cells properties are not useful on the D= SI >> >> controller nodes; they are only useful/required on ports and panel(s)= . >> >> So remove them from the controller node and add them where actually >> >> needed on the various rk3399 based boards. >> >>=20 >> >> Next to that, there were several (exact) redefinitions of nodes which >> >> are already present in rk3399-base.dtsi to add a mipi_out endpoint. >> >> Simplify that by referencing the mipi_out phandle and add the endpoin= t >> >> to that, which allows the removeal of the ports redefinition. >> >>=20 >> >> And fix 1 instance where the mipi_out referenced node was not sorted >> >> correctly. >> >>=20 >> >> This fixes the following DTB validation warnings: >> >>=20 >> >> unnecessary #address-cells/#size-cells without "ranges", >> >> "dma-ranges" or child "reg" property >> >>=20 >> > >> > Too many unrelated changes in this commit, please split into multiple= =20 >> > commits. >> > >> > I could identify: >> > >> > - moving address-cells/size-cells from SoC.dtsi to board dts(i)s, >> > - reordering properties to better match DT coding style=20 >> > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/devicetree/bindings/dts-coding-= style.html#order-of-properties-in-device-node >> > - use phandle to directly access ports, >> > - reorder DT node to better match DT coding style=20 >> > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/devicetree/bindings/dts-coding-= style.html#order-of-nodes >>=20 >> I initially had it as several commits, but that resulted in (f.e.) 1 >> issue being fixed, but 1 (or more) others would pop up. >> Those were then fixed in follow-up commits, but I assumed I'd get Rob's >> bot screaming at me for introducing new warnings (first). >>=20 >> And as they all relate(d) to fixing the dsi node, I then choose to >> combine them (but still separated by SoC). >> IMO there are several ways to organize the commits and each would have >> their pros and cons, so I 'settled' for this arrangement. >>=20 >> So I prefer to wait for other people's opinion first before reorganizing >> the commits again (if there's a different consensus). > > personally, I can live with the current setup here, because as you said > it's all DSI related, and also not a functional change ;-) . > > I guess you _could_ move the clock-master + status moves into a separate > patch, as that should not trigger any warnings. After having thought a bit more about it, I actually agree that the moving of address/size-cells from SoC to board dts[i] should be separate from extracting the ports/endpoints into a node with a phandle reference. This patch set is actually from 2 branches: - dtb-fixes-dsi - dtb-fixes-ports-endpoints (although I now use 'dtb-fixes-fruit') ports-endpoints is on top of dsi and came forth as it made sense to do the ports/endpoints extraction in more places. I'll then also put the DT node movement in a separate patch. I'm not a fan of putting clock-master + status property move into a separate patch as then the address/size patch would look weird (to me) as you'd see how those properties were inconsistently sorted ... just so that can be fixed in a separate patch. Cheers, Diederik --45ff3aaff99b43270ac8aa38352e1e585a3b95bead335ff4d3af9d1accaf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYKAB0WIQT1sUPBYsyGmi4usy/XblvOeH7bbgUCaF+ufwAKCRDXblvOeH7b biZgAQCME6QUUiJaphH6VGnwcT9ww6WdV692xu7Owyds/SRnrQD/dSITCnYbGopt SHRh40ahmolnhZl8p4Azfb0upjxs9gs= =rbBp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --45ff3aaff99b43270ac8aa38352e1e585a3b95bead335ff4d3af9d1accaf--