Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: media: qcom,x1e80100-camss: Sort interconnects alphabetically

[Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@linaro.org>]

On 6/24/25 15:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/06/2025 13:38, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> On 6/24/25 13:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 24/06/2025 11:42, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>> Sort the entries of interconnect and interconnect-names lists in the
>>>> alphabetical order of values in the latter property.
>>>
>>> We do not sort these entries alphabetically and you did not explain why
>>> you are doing this.
>>
>> I did it, because I assume that the preference is to sort all named
>> values alphanumerically.
> 
> Where is such preference documented?

There is no such preference documented, as I stated it was my assumption
and it was based on your firm insistance to apply a particular sorting
order for regs, clocks and interrupts properties. Apparently you are
fine with out of the same sort order for 'interconnects' values, the
criteria of picked properties remains unclear for me.

>>
>> Since my assumption is incorrect, I kindly ask to let me know, which
>> properties should have values sorted by alphanumerical order of
>> ${property}-names values and which are not, there should be a method
>> to distinguish such different properties.
> 
> None of them "should" as in "break ABI" or "change something later". I
> don't understand why again we keep discussing such trivialities which

A triviality for you is not a universal triviality, that's why people
ask questions to remove uncertainty, the question asked above has never
been discussed with me, and the answer is not given also.

Regarding "breaking the ABI", it's been discussed earlier that no dt
binding user in the upstream implies no ABI break practically.

I believe this change shall be dropped from the series, it's not
important at all.

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir