On 13/04/2022 23:48, Doug Anderson wrote: > I'm actually kinda curious: is there really a good reason for this? I > know I haven't been adding things to > `Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml` for Qualcomm > Chromebooks. Ironically, it turns out that the script I typically use > to invoke checkpatch happens to have "--no-tree" as an argument and > that seems to disable this check. Doh! > > That being said, though, I do wonder a little bit about the value of > enumerating the top-level compatible like this in a yaml file. > Certainly the yaml schema validation in general can be quite useful, > but this top-level listing seems pure overhead. I guess it makes some > tools happy, but other than that it seems to provide very little > value... If compatible is not part of ABI, it is allowed to change in whatever shape one wishes. In such case, how can anyone (e.g. user-space) identify the board? Model name? Also not part of ABI (not documented)... Best regards, Krzysztof
