[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f265576c-7d83-40cb-b857-7ec54ef9ab46@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 08:11:18 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>, Shawn Guo
<shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Martin Kepplinger <martink@...teo.de>,
Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com>,
"Paul J. Murphy" <paul.j.murphy@...el.com>,
Daniele Alessandrelli <daniele.alessandrelli@...el.com>,
Tommaso Merciai <tomm.merciai@...il.com>,
Martin Hecht <martin.hecht@...et.eu>, Zhi Mao <zhi.mao@...iatek.com>,
Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@...s.st.com>,
Mikhail Rudenko <mike.rudenko@...il.com>,
Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...nel.org>,
Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com>,
Umang Jain <umang.jain@...asonboard.com>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@...aro.org>,
Dongchun Zhu <dongchun.zhu@...iatek.com>,
Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...obroma-systems.com>,
Todor Tomov <todor.too@...il.com>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] media: dt-bindings: Use additionalProperties: false
for endpoint: properties:
On 14/10/2024 22:29, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 10:47:31AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 14/10/2024 10:31, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>>> On 14/10/2024 08:45, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> I do not understand the reasoning behind this change at all. I don't
>>>> think DT maintainers ever suggested it (in fact, rather opposite:
>>>> suggested using unevaluatedProps) and I think is not a consensus of any
>>>> talks.
>>>
>>> No there is not but then, how do you give consistent feedback except
>>> proposing something to be a baseline.
>>>
>>> On the one hand you have upstream additionalProperties: false and
>>> unevaluatedProperites: false - it'd be better to have a consistent
>>> message on which is to be used.
>>
>> Well, I am afraid that push towards additionalProps will lead to grow
>> common schema (video-interface-devices or video-interfaces) into huge
>> one-fit-all binding. And that's not good.
>>
>> If a common binding for a group of devices encourages you to list its
>> subset, then it is not that common.
>>
>> Solution is to fix that, e.g. split it per classes of devices.
>
> I think splitting large schemas per class is a good idea, but the
> problem will still exist. For instance, if we were to move the
> CSI-2-specific properties to a separate schema, that schema would define
> clock-lanes, data-lanes and clock-noncontinuous. The clock-lanes and
> clock-noncontinuous properties do not apply to every device, how would
> we then handle that ? I see three options:
Why is this a problem? Why is this a problem here, but not in other
subsystems having exactly the same case?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists