[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YiIdGTcqDyaaC1i9@robh.at.kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:07:21 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: kbuild: Use DTB files for validation
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 01:55:59PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:42:37PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > Switch the DT validation to use DTB files directly instead of a DTS to
> > YAML conversion.
> >
> > The original motivation for supporting validation on DTB files was to
> > enable running validation on a running system (e.g. 'dt-validate
> > /sys/firmware/fdt') or other cases where the original source DTS is not
> > available.
> >
> > The YAML format was not without issues. Using DTBs with the schema type
> > information solves some of those problems. The YAML format relies on the
> > DTS source level information including bracketing of properties, size
> > directives, and phandle tags all of which are lost in a DTB file. While
> > standardizing the bracketing is a good thing, it does cause a lot of
> > extra warnings and churn to fix them.
>
> It does indeed, but it's a bit sad to let that feature go :-S
I agree, but I think that checking is better served with a DTS linter.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists