Re: [RFC 6/9] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: add a PCI prefix for Qualcomm Atheros

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 09/01/2024 03:56, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 12:22 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can
>>>> define the QCA PCI devices on device tree.
>>>
>>> Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca'
>>> should be the prefix for those.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>
>> I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their
>> "pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable
>> strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain.
>>
>> I'm open to suggestions.
> 
> The checkpatch.pl check predates schemas and we could consider just
> dropping it. The only thing it provides is checking a patch rather
> than the tree (which the schema do). It's pretty hacky because it just
> greps the tree for a compatible string which is not entirely accurate.
> Also, we can extract an exact list of compatibles with
> "dt-extract-compatibles" which would make a better check, but I'm not
> sure making dtschema a dependency on checkpatch would be good.
> 
> The other option is just ignore the warning. PCI compatibles are fairly rare.

Yep, the same warnings are for EEPROM and USB VID/PID compatibles, and
we live with these, so I don't think PCI should be treated differently.

Best regards,
Krzysztof





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux