RE: The future of DT binding maintainership

[Chaiken, Alison]

Grant Likely wrote:
> Another thing discussed is that we need to start validating DT schema with an extension to dtc.

Is there a schema out there in the wild that exemplifies what you mean?

> Tomasz Figa has volunteered to do this work and has support from his employer

That's great news.

> to have is that the DT schema will get checked as part of the dts build
> process so that any DT file that doesn't match the documented schema
> will get flagged, and that the schema files will be human readable and
> will double as documentation.

No doubt DTS files are already the best documentation available for many targets.    The vendor's technical reference manual describes how the hardware is supposed to work, but the DTS describes what actually does.   Any errata that the vendor issues subsequent to publication of the TRM must be reflected in DTS, after all.

The schema-check idea reminds me of the W3C HTML validators:

      http://validator.w3.org/

Since device-tree source looks a bit like XML (or maybe more like JSON), will be the schemas be similar in spirit to DTDs, and is it helpful to think of the validator in this spirit?   Or will the checker be more like "gcc -Wall", since it will be invoked by a compiler?

-- Alison
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/