On 10/02/2025 20:15, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 09:50:37PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> Ah, neat, that would almost solve the problem but you wrote: >>> >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/memblock/reserve_mem.yaml# >>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>> >>> so no, this does not work like that. You use devicetree here namespace >>> and ignore its rules. >> >> ... and that obviously is barely parseable, so maybe one more try: >> "You use here devicetree namespace but ignore its rules." > > It makes sense to me, there should be zero cross-over of the two > specs, KHO should be completely self defined and stand alone. > > There is some documentation missing, I think. This yaml describes one > node type, but the entire overall structure of the fdt does not seem > to have documentation? A lot of ABI is missing there and undocumented like: node name (which for every standard DT would be a NAK), few properties. This binding describes only subset while skipping all the rest and effectively introducing implied/undocumented ABI. Best regards, Krzysztof
