Re: [PATCH] docs: dt-bindings: add DTS Coding Style document

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 16/11/2023 21:03, Heiko Stuebner wrote:

>>> I guess the only thing I do have questions about is the part
>>>
>>>> +4. All properties with values
>>>> +5. Boolean properties
>>>
>>> Is there a rationale for it? Because with it things like regulator-*
>>> properties then end up in two different blocks.
>>
>> Good point. It is only a matter of style that this:
>>
>> foo {
>> 	compatible = "foo";
>> 	reg = <0x1>;
>> 	clocks = <&clk>;
>> 	wakeup-source;
>> 	key-autorepeat;
>> }
>>
>> looks better to me than:
>>
>>
>> foo {
>> 	compatible = "foo";
>> 	reg = <0x1>;
>> 	key-autorepeat;
>> 	wakeup-source;
>> 	clocks = <&clk>;
>> }
>>
>> But you have good point that similar properties should be usually
>> grouped together.
>>
>> About which regulator properties are you thinking now? You mean the
>> supplies or the provider?
> 
> I was thinking about the provider. There are 
> 	regulator-min-microvolt = <>;
> and friends, but also
> 	regulator-boot-on;

These are in regulator provider nodes and above guideline would keep
logical order:

	regulator-name = "vdd_kfc";
	regulator-min-microvolt = <800000>;
	regulator-max-microvolt = <1500000>;
	regulator-always-on;
	regulator-boot-on;

	regulator-state-mem {
		regulator-off-in-suspend;
	};

What exactly would be here misordered?

> 
> 
> I guess I would just go with
> 
> 1. compatible
> 2. reg
> 3. ranges
> 4. All other properties
> 5. status (if applicable)
> 6. Child nodes
> 
> aka grouping the old 4+5 together. The difference is probably minimal
> but doesn't create corner cases and you don't need to know if a property
> has a value or is boolean when looking for it.


Best regards,
Krzysztof