[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <CZIJ8D23O5E1.79MDD3DCHPI8@bootlin.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:52:07 +0100
From: Théo Lebrun <theo.lebrun@...tlin.com>
To: "Rob Herring" <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, "Guenter Roeck"
<linux@...ck-us.net>, "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, "Andi
Shyti" <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, "Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>, "Gregory Clement"
<gregory.clement@...tlin.com>, "Vladimir Kondratiev"
<vladimir.kondratiev@...ileye.com>, "Thomas Petazzoni"
<thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, "Tawfik Bayouk"
<tawfik.bayouk@...ileye.com>, "Jean Delvare" <jdelvare@...e.com>,
<linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/11] dt-bindings: hwmon: lm75: use common hwmon
schema
Hello,
On Fri Mar 1, 2024 at 4:35 PM CET, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 11:44:37AM +0100, Théo Lebrun wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Fri Mar 1, 2024 at 11:13 AM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 01/03/2024 10:41, Théo Lebrun wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > On Fri Mar 1, 2024 at 7:53 AM CET, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > >> On 2/29/24 22:37, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > >>> On 29/02/2024 19:10, Théo Lebrun wrote:
> > > >>>> Reference common hwmon schema which has the generic "label" property,
> > > >>>> parsed by Linux hwmon subsystem.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Please do not mix independent patchsets. You create unneeded
> > > >>> dependencies blocking this patch. This patch depends on hwmon work, so
> > > >>> it cannot go through different tree.
> > > >
> > > > I had to pick between this or dtbs_check failing on my DTS that uses a
> > > > label on temperature-sensor@48.
> > >
> > > I don't see how is that relevant. You can organize your branches as you
> > > wish, e.g. base one b4 branch on another and you will not have any warnings.
> >
> > That is what I do, I however do not want mips-next to have errors when
> > running dtbs_check. Having dtbs_check return errors is not an issue?
>
> That's a good goal, but difficult to achieve as you can see. Given
> dtbs_check in general has tons of warnings already, we currently don't
> worry about more warnings in specific branches. We just look at mainline
> and linux-next. And for that it's still so many, I'm just looking at
> general trends. It runs daily here[1].
Here's my opportunity to ask a question I've had for a while: do you
have a way to filter out dtbs that are known to be bad actors (ie have
many many warnings)? Maybe a list of platforms you talk about below
that aim at zero warnings?
Another way to ask this: what would be a good default DT_SCHEMA_FILES
value? Not filtering leads to way too many errors.
Regards,
--
Théo Lebrun, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists