Re: dtbs_check issue

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 4:18 PM Lad, Prabhakar
<prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 5:57 PM Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 9:23 AM Lad, Prabhakar
> > <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Krzysztof,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 4:12 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 21/07/2022 17:07, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > > > > Fyi keeping even a single SMARC board in arm renesas.yaml schema I see
> > > > > dtbs_check failures.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any pointers on how I can get around this issue?
> > > >
> > > > Few months ago:
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/cf7728fd-b5c8-cd3d-6074-d27f38f86545@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > > >
> > > Thanks for the link.
> > >
> > > > Although Rob admitted in the thread this is in general allowed
> > > > configuration, to me it is still confusing - the left-most compatible is
> > > > not the most specific. Non obvious, confusing and it seems dtschema does
> > > > not support it?
> > > >
> > > It looks like dtschema does not support it.
> >
> > The issue is the same as licensed IP where we have a generic
> > compatible and per licensee compatibles in separate schemas. The
> > solution anytime a compatible exists in more than 1 schema is a custom
> > 'select' which excludes that compatible. That would be messy here
> > though due to the large number of compatibles. Perhaps we could
> > instead merge a custom select with the default generated one. Then the
> > schema would just need:
> >
> > select:
> >   not:
> >     properties:
> >       contains:
> >         const: renesas,smarc-evk
> >
> > We'd have to figure out when to merge or not merge. Maybe only merge a
> > 'not' schema.
> >
> Agreed with this approach the select list might keep growing.
>
> >
> > The other way to solve this is simply not having 2 schema files. Why
> > do we have SoC/board schemas under a CPU arch directory? There's
> > nothing architecture specific about them (I have the same opinion on
> > .dts files too). So I'd be in favor of putting all root node schemas
> > in one directory.
> >
> Agreed, but what do we name the directory which has root node schemas?

'root' for root node schemas?

>
> Geert, are you ok with moving the schema out and having a single file
> for all the Renesas SoC'/Boards?

I didn't say I was in favor of putting 1 schema there, but 'all root
node schemas'.


Rob



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux