[PATCH v3 6/8] arm64: dts: bst: add support for Black Sesame Technologies C1200 CDCU1.0 board

[Albert Yang]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 08:14:05AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/09/2025 05:40, Albert Yang wrote:
> >
> >>> +           gic: interrupt-controller at 32800000 {
> >>> +                   compatible = "arm,gic-v3";
> >>> +                   #interrupt-cells = <3>;
> >>> +                   #address-cells = <2>;
> >>> +                   #size-cells = <2>;
> >>> +                   interrupt-controller;
> >>> +                   ranges;
> >>> +                   reg = <0x0 0x32800000 0x0 0x10000>,
> >>> +                         <0x0 0x32880000 0x0 0x100000>;
> >>
> >> Random order...
> >
> > Refs: arm,gic‑v3 binding
> > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/torvalds/linux/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/arm,gic-v3.yaml
> > Updated as follows:
>
> No, you need to finally read and follow DTS coding style.
>
> >             gic: interrupt-controller at 32800000 {
> >                     compatible = "arm,gic-v3";
> >

Thank you for pointing out the DTS coding style requirements. I have now
carefully reviewed the documentation and updated the GIC node as follows.

I have a question regarding the property ordering. According to the DTS
coding style documentation at:
https://docs.kernel.org/devicetree/bindings/dts-coding-style.html

The preferred order of properties in device nodes is:

1.“compatible”
2.“reg”
3.“ranges”
4.Standard/common properties (defined by common bindings, e.g. without vendor-prefixes)
5.Vendor-specific properties
6.“status” (if applicable)
7.Child nodes, where each node is preceded with a blank line

However, I'm uncertain about how to order properties that start with "#".
I have treated them as standard/common properties and updated the node as follows.
Could you please confirm if this approach is correct?


		gic: interrupt-controller at 32800000 {
			compatible = "arm,gic-v3";
			reg = <0x0 0x32800000 0x0 0x10000>,
			      <0x0 0x32880000 0x0 0x100000>;
			ranges;
			#address-cells = <2>;
			#interrupt-cells = <3>;
			interrupt-controller;
			interrupts = <GIC_PPI 9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
			#size-cells = <2>;
		};

I apologize for missing one of your previous comments. I will address it here:
>> +
>> +&uart0 {
>> +	status = "okay";
>> +};
>> +
>> +&mmc0 {
>
>This is none of the two approved ordering styles from DTS coding style.
>What sort of coding style are you using?

You are absolutely right. I have corrected the node ordering to follow 
the alphabetical style as specified in the DTS coding style documentation:

&mmc0 {
	bus-width = <8>;
	memory-region = <&mmc0_reserved>;
	non-removable;
	status = "okay";
};

&uart0 {
	status = "okay";
};

Thank you very much for your thorough review and patience. I will ensure 
that all future submissions strictly follow the DTS coding style guidelines. 
If you have any additional feedback, please let me know, and I will address 
it promptly to maintain consistency throughout the patch series.

Best regards,
Albert