On 16/04/2023 09:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 15/04/2023 22:12, Saalim Quadri wrote: >>> You choose unusual bindings to convert to DT schema. It is fine but >>> honestly, less useful, with limited impact. This is an old, 12 year old >>> binding without users. Maybe it would be even removed by now... >>> I suggest converting ones which have a real impact - have users in DTS. >>> Otherwise you will be putting quite a lot of effort for no real gains... >>> because what is the difference between this binding being TXT and DT schema? >> >> I am converting these bindings as part of my GSoC project where I need to convert >> as many files as possible during the given tenure, I am slowly trying to read files >> in other subsystems too and will push patches for other subsystems too. >> Is it fine? > > In general it is fine. I wonder if we can change the goal of GSoC? I am > surprised that such goal was chosen in the first place. Converting old, > unused bindings to DT schema is okay, but it would be much better to do > this for the bindings which are actually used. > > Because I still wonder - what is the difference between this binding > being TXT and DT schema? BTW, If you want to find used bindings and tasks to do, check Rob's bot output: https://gitlab.com/robherring/linux-dt/-/jobs/4118960859 https://gitlab.com/robherring/linux-dt/-/jobs/4118960858 I pointed to these jobs two months ago when Daniel was looking for some feedback. Best regards, Krzysztof
