On 28/10/2022 08:38, Thierry Reding wrote: >>> >>> I understand you may not like this approach, however, this comment is >>> not really relevant to just this patch, but a general comment. But yes >>> we will ensure that this is correct. >>> >> >> Just to clarify - this status looks redundant, but I have no way to tell >> for sure... > > But that's independent of whether we specify this using the full path or > reference the node by label, isn't it? The only way to make sure that a > status = "okay" is not redundant is by manual inspection. I don't know > of an automated way to do that. Perhaps it's something that could be > added as a check to DTC? With overrides/extends pattern it is easy to spot one case of mistakes - you see override, then status might be needed might not. You see new node (like here!) - then status=okay is redundant. Best regards, Krzysztof
