Re: [PATCH 1/1] of: unittest: rename overlay source files from .dts to .dtso

[David Gibson]

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 04:21:48PM -0500, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 5/26/21 1:11 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 22-04-21, 13:54, Frank Rowand wrote:
> >> On 4/22/21 3:44 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>> Hi Frank, Rob,
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 9:23 PM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> On 3/27/21 12:40 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 05:37:13PM -0500, frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>>>>> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Add Makefile rule to build .dtbo.o assembly file from overlay .dtso
> >>>>>> source file.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rename unittest .dts overlay source files to use .dtso suffix.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm pretty lukewarm on .dtso...
> >>>>
> >>>> I was originally also, but I'm warming up to it.
> >>>
> >>> What's the status of this?
> >>
> >> I was planning to resend on top of the upcoming -rc1.
> > 
> > Ping.
> > 
> 
> Thanks for the prod...
> 
> The .dtso convention was added to the dtc compiler, then a patch was
> accepted to revert one mention of .dtso ,though there still remains
> two location where .dtbo is still recognized (guess_type_by_name() in
> dtc and the help text of the fdtoverlay program).
> 
> It seems that the general .dtso and .dtbo were not popular, so I'm
> going to drop this patch instead of continuing to try to get it
> accepted.

AFAICT .dtbo is moderately well established, and I think it's a good
convention, since it matters whether a blob is an overlay or base
tree, and it's not trivial to tell which is which.

.dtso is much more recent, and I think there's much less value to it.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature