Hi Rob,
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 at 15:18, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 09 Oct 2023 14:10:00 -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Add two compatible for binman entries, as a starting point for the
> > schema.
> >
> > Note that, after discussion on v2, we decided to keep the existing
> > meaning of label so as not to require changes to existing userspace
> > software when moving to use binman nodes to specify the firmware
> > layout.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes in v3:
> > - Drop fixed-partitions from the example
> > - Use compatible instead of label
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Use plain partition@xxx for the node name
> >
> > .../mtd/partitions/binman-partition.yaml | 48 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/binman-partition.yaml
> >
>
> My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check'
> on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13):
>
> yamllint warnings/errors:
>
> dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
> /builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/binman-partition.yaml: properties:compatible:items: {'enum': ['u-boot', 'atf-bl31']} is not of type 'array'
> from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/string-array.yaml#
>
> doc reference errors (make refcheckdocs):
>
> See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/devicetree-bindings/patch/20231009201005.1964794-2-sjg@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> The base for the series is generally the latest rc1. A different dependency
> should be noted in *this* patch.
>
> If you already ran 'make dt_binding_check' and didn't see the above
> error(s), then make sure 'yamllint' is installed and dt-schema is up to
> date:
>
> pip3 install dtschema --upgrade
>
> Please check and re-submit after running the above command yourself. Note
> that DT_SCHEMA_FILES can be set to your schema file to speed up checking
> your schema. However, it must be unset to test all examples with your schema.
>
Oh dear, I didn't notice that output but I see it now. Could the check
return a non-zero exit code if something goes wrong?
Anyway, I'll send v4
Regards,
Simon
