[Ksummit-2013-discuss] DT bindings as ABI [was: Do we have people interested in device tree janitoring / cleanup?]
dwmw2 at infradead.org
Fri Jul 26 10:16:39 EDT 2013
On Fri, 2013-07-26 at 10:14 -0400, jonsmirl at gmail.com wrote:
> Yes, yes - that's why the schema should be written down and used as a
> validation input to dtc. Then dtc can spit out errors for non-standard
> items. There would be two versions - the standard one and a legacy one
> that includes the standard one plus the hacks that can't be undone.
> But more importantly it provides a framework for people creating new
> node definitions. Now they can't work in a vacuum and come up with
> random names and structure for everything.
> Most of the problems express in the thread would go away if the schema
> was written down and discussed. The rule going forward would be no new
> nodes that aren't part of the standard schema.
Yes, that seems eminently sensible.
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse at intel.com Intel Corporation
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 5745 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the linux-arm-kernel