On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 01:43:34PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 03:32:46AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > This is the first batch of patches converting the Marvell MVEBU driver > > bindings from .txt to .yaml. So far, kirkwood has been used for > > testing, but these drivers apply to a range of Marvell SoCs. > > > > In order to reduce the number of warnings from the DT schema checking > > tools, a few minor changes have been made to a few DT files. No actual > > errors have been found, the changes just make the checker quiet. > > > > I propose these patches are merged via mvebu to arm-soc. No conflicts > > are expected with these patches. > > Why? I strongly prefer the bindings go via subsystem trees. That is the > documented way. I have 50 patches to convert kirkwood from .txt to .yaml. probably around 30 subsystems. 1) Complete nightmare to keep track of so many different patchsets going in 30 different directions. 2) None of these patches change any driver code. This is pure 'Documentation'. The subsystem probably reviewed the .txt file 10 years ago when I and other mvebu maintainers submitted them. Nothing is changing in the kernel code base, except now we gain some degree of validation for this 'Documentation'. 3) Pretty much all of these were merged via arm-soc 10 years ago. Why do it different now? What is gained by not going via arm-soc? Andrew
