On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 3:51 AM Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Krzysztof, > > Am Montag, 14. Oktober 2024, 09:49:14 CEST schrieb 'Krzysztof Kozlowski' via upstream: > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 10:07:30PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > > This is a proof-of-concept patch that introduces a debug feature I find > > > particularly useful. I frequently encounter situations where I'm > > > uncertain if my device tree configuration is correct or being utilized > > > by the kernel. This is especially common when porting device trees > > > from vendor kernels, as some properties may have slightly different > > > names in the upstream kernel, or upstream drivers may not use certain > > > properties at all. > > > > In general I don't mind, but I have a comment about above rationale. > > It's just wrong. The point of DT is to describe hardware, not the one > > given, fixed in time implementation. > > I agree with you, sorry for being imprecise. > > > What's more, writing bindings mentions this explicit: make binding > > complete, even if it is not used. > > Yes, with this aid, it is IMHO easier to find bindings that need attention. > Just as an example, lately the device tree of a vendor used the property "timers", > but in mainline it is "ti,timers". With this debug feature, it is easy to see that > "timers" is not being used, and somebody has to decide whether the property is > really not used by a driver, or if the binding needs more work. Paying attention to the schema warnings would have found this issue. Assuming there is a schema for the node... That's not to say this type of run-time check is not also useful. Rob
