[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250331-amphibian-hopping-bobcat-e19a0b@houat>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 09:53:47 +0200
From: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Vignesh Raman <vignesh.raman@...labora.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, daniels@...labora.com, helen.fornazier@...il.com,
airlied@...il.com, simona.vetter@...ll.ch, robdclark@...il.com,
guilherme.gallo@...labora.com, sergi.blanch.torne@...labora.com, valentine.burley@...labora.com,
lumag@...nel.org, quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com, maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com,
tzimmermann@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] drm/ci: Add jobs to validate devicetrees
On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 08:06:45PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 09:31:11PM +0530, Vignesh Raman wrote:
> > Add jobs to run dt_binding_check and dtbs_check. If warnings are seen,
> > exit with a non-zero error code while configuring them as warning in
> > the GitLab CI pipeline.
>
> Can it really succeed or is it going to be an always-failing job? The
> dt_binding_check generally succeed, dtbs_check generates tons of
> warnings. We are trying to make progress there, but it's still very far
> from being achevable.
It depends on the platforms I guess. Some are 100% covered and any
warning should be treated as a failure, and some have not started the
effort.
I guess we could solve it with some kind of expectation list, but I do
wonder if it's something *we* should be focusing on :)
Maxime
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists