Re: Hardware registry schema proposal

[Minas Hambardzumyan <minas@ti.com>]

Hello Ben,

On 10/9/25 03:19, Ben Copeland wrote:
> Hello Minas,
> 
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 at 22:20, Hambardzumyan, Minas <minas@ti.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I signed up a couple of weeks ago to propose a schema for organizing information about the hardware tested in Kernel-CI labs.
>>
>> Please review and share your comments on a proposed schema here:
>> https://github.com/TexasInstruments-Sandbox/KernelCi-collaboration/blob/main/hardware_registry/hardware_registry_schema.yaml
>>
>> along with an example yaml file here:
>> https://github.com/TexasInstruments-Sandbox/KernelCi-collaboration/blob/main/hardware_registry/hardware_registry.yaml
>>
>> In summary, the schema defines following main sections with cross references:
>>
>> * silicon_vendors: A collection of silicon vendors (processors, SOCs)
>> * platform_vendors: A collection of platform vendors (servers, laptops, boards, etc.)
>> * processors: A collection of processors used on tested platforms
>> * system_modules: A collection of system modules (SoMs, SiPs)
>> * platforms: A collection of platforms tested in labs
> 
> I think it would also make sense to add revisions in.
> 
> If you look at LAVA, you can see the messiness of not having revisions
> https://gitlab.com/lava/lava/-/tree/master/etc/dispatcher-config/device-types?ref_type=heads

I added version to the schema and example -- please review (committed at 
the same URLs above).

Minas

> 
> Ben
> 
>>
>> Regards,
>> Minas.
>>