Re: dtbs_check issue

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

 



On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 7:29 AM Lad, Prabhakar
<prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 12:08 PM Lad, Prabhakar
> <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 11:24 PM Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > 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
> > > > >
> Being a novice here with the select, I added the below to ignore the
> arm schema if its the RISC-V board:
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml
> index ff80152f092f..77e78136bfce 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml
> @@ -9,6 +9,16 @@ title: Renesas SH-Mobile, R-Mobile, and R-Car
> Platform Device Tree Bindings
>  maintainers:
>    - Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> +# We want ignore this schema if the board is of RISC-V arch
> +select:
> +  not:
> +    properties:
> +      compatible:
> +        contains:
> +          const: renesas,r9a07g043f1
> +    required:
> +      - compatible
> +
>  properties:
>    $nodename:
>      const: '/'
>
> But when I run the dt_binding_check, I get the below issues:

That would only work if we change how 'select' is generated. As I
said, the above would have to be merged with what we normally generate
(see processed-schema.json for what that looks like).

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