On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:29:35PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 06/13/16 22:10, David Gibson wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 08:53:37PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote: > >> On 06/13/16 18:10, David Gibson wrote: > > < snip > > > >>> Here's my inclination for how to treat this in dtc for the time being: > >>> 1) Leave the bulk of dtc case sensitive, as now > >>> 2) Add a new check which will generate an error if there are node > >>> names which differ only in case. > >>> > >>> Any objections to that plan? > >> > >> I think that the kernel should match the current behavior of dtc. > >> > >> I agree with "1)". > >> > >> I don't think that "2)" is required. I think it is a really dumb idea for > >> anyone to create a dts with node names that differ only in case. But I > >> don't think it is the compiler's job to protect people from being dumb. > >> An analogue would be the C language and compilers. The C compiler doesn't > >> error on a program that has variables "foo" and "Foo". > > > > Hmm.. actually I think protecting you from being dumb is exactly the > > purpose of compiler warnings. Now that you found that quote from > > 1275, which is pretty definitive as far as I'm concerned, I'd expect > > to reduce that error to a warning (by default). > > A warning is ok by me. Ok, I'll implement that when I get a chance. Note that in most cases there's no fundamental distinction between dtc errors and dtc warnings - it's just a question of whether they're flagged as "error" or "warning" level in the check table. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
