On 12/01/2025 12:49 pm, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On Tue, 07 Jan 2025 11:32:41 +0000, James Clark james.clark@linaro.org wrote:
From: James Clark james.clark@arm.com
There are a few entries particularly at the end of the file that aren't in order. To avoid confusion, add a comment that might help new entries to be added in the right place.
Reviewed-by: Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org Signed-off-by: James Clark james.clark@arm.com Signed-off-by: James Clark james.clark@linaro.org
arch/arm64/tools/sysreg | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/tools/sysreg b/arch/arm64/tools/sysreg index b081b54d6d22..4ba167089e2a 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/tools/sysreg +++ b/arch/arm64/tools/sysreg @@ -48,6 +48,8 @@ # feature that introduces them (eg, FEAT_LS64_ACCDATA introduces enumeration # item ACCDATA) though it may be more taseful to do something else. +# Please try to keep entries in this file sorted by sysreg encoding.
- Sysreg OSDTRRX_EL1 2 0 0 0 2 Res0 63:32 Field 31:0 DTRRX
"Do as I say, don't do as I do".
I don't think this makes any sense if we don't actually sort the file the first place.
M.
I think it's ok if it avoids review comments that new entries should be sorted. Or maybe we do the opposite and the comment should say this file is allowed to be unsorted...