Am Montag, 20. Januar 2025, 11:34:25 CET schrieb Michael Riesch: > >> Maybe open a new section "# Compile time tests" or something like that? > >> > > > > The above line is to compile the build-time test of overlay application > > (notice the missing o in the extension). This points at the target below > > (which ends with -dtbs), which does require the dtbo to exist. So > > essentially, they are both for the build-time test of applying (and > > generating) DTBO. I feel like this comment/section would add to the > > confusion? I may have misunderstood what you are suggesting, can you > > provide an example? > > Thanks for the explanation. At the beginning I was wondering what the > point of this line was, and thought that a comment that explains the > purpose of it would be beneficial. > > Maybe it makes sense to provide a section so that other contributors > know where to sort in their tests, so maybe > > # Overlays > dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rk3588-edgeble-neu6a-wifi.dtb > [...] > > # Compile-time tests for overlays (and combinations thereof) > rk3588-edgeble-neu6a-wifi-dtbs := rk3588-edgeble-neu6a-io.dtb > rk3588-edgeble-neu6a-wifi.dtbo > [...] I do feel that both parts belong to each other, and we're reading from top, so personally I'd go with Krzysztof's suggestion. # Overlays rk3588-edgeble-neu6a-wifi-dtbs := rk3588-edgeble-neu6a-io.dtb rk3588-edgeble-neu6a-wifi.dtbo dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rk3588-edgeble-neu6a-wifi.dtb Having separate blocks for overlays and the description of the building blocks just causes the reader to jump up and down between sections, especially once those parts become larger, so please keep things together. Heiko
