[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqL9PyD=0jy+GF5g8ee-FO_ijvArnzEohuvqK5Od3yr7fg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 09:13:01 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: "heiko@...ech.de" <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sean Hudson <darknighte@...knighte.com>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@....com>,
Kumar Gala <kumar.gala@...aro.org>,
ARM-SoC Maintainers <arm@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2.1 24/34] dt-bindings: arm: Convert Rockchip board/soc
bindings to json-schema
On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 4:14 PM Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de> wrote:
>
> Convert Rockchip SoC bindings to DT schema format using json-schema.
>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
> Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> Cc: linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> [move to per-board entries and added recently added boards]
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
> ---
> Hi Rob,
>
> there are boards where the description adds much value and on others
> it is maybe less, but personally I'd like to keep things uniform,
> as that makes reading these things easier if the format stays the
> same all the time, so I've gone forward and just did the conversion
>
> make dtbs_check did not complain about the schema it seems but I
> did end up with an error later on:
>
> FATAL ERROR: Unknown output format "yaml"
> make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:313: arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3036-evb.dt.yaml] Fehler 1
You need libyaml and its headers installed so dtc can output yaml, but
that's not needed for checking the schema against the meta-schema.
> But I guess I did not mess up the schema yet.
>
> So does it look ok that way?
Yes, but one comment...
> + - description: Firefly Firefly-RK3288
> + items:
> + - const: firefly,firefly-rk3288
> + - const: rockchip,rk3288
> +
> + - description: Firefly Firefly-RK3288 (beta board)
> + items:
> + - const: firefly,firefly-rk3288-beta
> + - const: rockchip,rk3288
> +
> + - description: Firefly Firefly-RK3288 Reload
Seems like combining these 3 (or first 2?) would make sense if this is
just revs of the same board.
But either way is fine.
> + items:
> + - const: firefly,firefly-rk3288-reload
> + - const: rockchip,rk3288
Powered by blists - more mailing lists