linux-kernel - Re: The future of DT binding maintainership

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20130724202617.049E33E13AF@localhost>
Date:	Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:26:16 +0100
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	Jon Loeliger <jdl@....com>, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>
Cc:	"Chaiken, Alison" <Alison_Chaiken@...tor.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: The future of DT binding maintainership

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 16:34:49 -0500, Jon Loeliger <jdl@....com> wrote:
> 
> > > Is there a schema out there in the wild that exemplifies what you mean?
> > 
> > Not really. The format of schemas is currently in design stage. I'm 
> > currently rethinking some details of what I have in my mind. Give me some 
> > more time and I will post an RFC to the ML with all that written down.
> 
> ...and...
> 
> > > The schema-check idea reminds me of the W3C HTML validators:
> > > 
> > >       http://validator.w3.org/
> > > 
> > > Since device-tree source looks a bit like XML (or maybe more like JSON),
> > > will be the schemas be similar in spirit to DTDs, and is it helpful to
> > > think of the validator in this spirit?   Or will the checker be more
> > > like "gcc -Wall", since it will be invoked by a compiler?
> > 
> > My idea is to implement compile time verification in dtc, so I guess it 
> > will be more like the latter. Since dts is what dtc can already parse, my 
> > plan is to keep the schemas in spirit to dts, just modifying/extending it 
> > to allow specifying bindings with them, rather than static values.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Tomasz
> 
> It is possible to add some-damn XML DTD parsing and

/me runs screaming.

g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/