On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 12:24 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 5:32 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/iio/mount-matrix.txt | 204 ++++++++++++++++++ > > So this is a device tree binding. > > > So forgive me, but I have to ask: what are the chances of getting this > > file in RST format? It's 99% of the way there now, finishing the job > > would allow it to be integrated into our docs tree. > > > > It should probably have an SPDX line too. > > The recent direction of the Device Tree bindings are not in the RST > direction but in the direction of using another formal structure: YAML > schemas. > > See e.g. Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml > > The YAML schema makes it possible to verify device trees and examples > inside the bindings to the specification using a context-free grammar. > > If we can join the RST and YAML ambitions is a good question. RST > has nice typesetting properties, YAML has nice grammatic properties. In fact there has been some experimentation there. The 'description' portion of DT schema can be RST. And the rest being structured data could be transformed to RST. Grant did some experiments there. The idea being to generate the DT spec from schema (rather than integrate into the kernel docs). But not much progress there and it's not something I'm spending time on ATM. Rob
