From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Loeliger Subject: Re: [RFC 00/15] Device Tree schemas and validation Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 08:22:58 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1380041541-17529-1-git-send-email-bcousson@baylibre.com> <524A8289.3050107@baylibre.com> <524ACB76.1010001@gmail.com> <524AE4FB.4080906@baylibre.com> <524BE66D.7060308@baylibre.com> Return-path: In-reply-to: <524BE66D.7060308-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Benoit Cousson Cc: Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org, Pawel Moll , Ian Campbell , olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, tomasz.figa-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org, khilman-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, fparent-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org > > > > Benoit, > > > > Sorry, I meant to ask earlier but forgot. > > Shouldn't this development be based on the > > upstream DTC repository and not the in-kernel > > copy of the DTC? > > Eventually, yes, We should *start* there, though. > but here the main point is to discuss the schema that > will be used to defined bindings. > In that case, the DTC patches code are mostly a proof of concept Sure; all that is fine. > using the Linux kernel as example. Example?(*) We shouldn't churn the kernel. jdl (*) In the sense that *this* Universe is just one example from all known Universes? :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jdl@jdl.com (Jon Loeliger) Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 08:22:58 -0500 Subject: [RFC 00/15] Device Tree schemas and validation In-Reply-To: <524BE66D.7060308@baylibre.com> References: <1380041541-17529-1-git-send-email-bcousson@baylibre.com> <524A8289.3050107@baylibre.com> <524ACB76.1010001@gmail.com> <524AE4FB.4080906@baylibre.com> <524BE66D.7060308@baylibre.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > > > > Benoit, > > > > Sorry, I meant to ask earlier but forgot. > > Shouldn't this development be based on the > > upstream DTC repository and not the in-kernel > > copy of the DTC? > > Eventually, yes, We should *start* there, though. > but here the main point is to discuss the schema that > will be used to defined bindings. > In that case, the DTC patches code are mostly a proof of concept Sure; all that is fine. > using the Linux kernel as example. Example?(*) We shouldn't churn the kernel. jdl (*) In the sense that *this* Universe is just one example from all known Universes? :-)