From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: david@gibson.dropbear.id.au (David Gibson) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 00:24:11 +1100 Subject: [RFC PATCH dtc] C-based DT schema checker integrated into dtc In-Reply-To: <5272C80A.7070204@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1382651488-9696-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <20131024234340.ADF70C403B6@trevor.secretlab.ca> <526A83B9.30800@wwwdotorg.org> <20131028101737.GC15114@voom.fritz.box> <5272C80A.7070204@wwwdotorg.org> Message-ID: <20131101132411.GC3430@voom.fritz.box> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:13:46PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 10/28/2013 04:17 AM, David Gibson wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 03:44:09PM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> On 10/25/2013 12:43 AM, Grant Likely wrote: > >>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 22:51:28 +0100, Stephen Warren > >>> wrote: > >>>> From: Stephen Warren > >>>> > >>>> This is a very quick proof-of-concept re: how a DT schema > >>>> checker might look if written in C, and integrated into dtc. > >>> > >>> Thanks for looking at this. > >>> > >>> Very interesting. Certainly an expedient way to start checking > >>> schemas, and for certain bindings it may be the best approach. > >>> The downside is it forces a recompilation of DTC to bring in > >>> new bindings and it isn't a great meduim for mixing schema with > >>> documentation in the bindings. > >> > >> This approach would certainly require recompiling something. I > >> threw the code into dtc simply because it was the easiest > >> container for the demonstration. It could be a separate DT > >> validation utility if we wanted, although we'd need to split the > >> DT parser from dtc into a library to avoid code duplication. The > >> resultant utility could be part of the repo containing the DTs, > >> so it didn't end up as a separate package to manage. > >> > >> I think the additional documentation could be added as comments > >> in the validation functions, just like IIRC it was to be > >> represented as comments even in the .dts-based schema proposals. > > > > Fwiw, I've been starting to do some hacking on the checks code, > > with a view to making it accomodate the schema stuff better. > > Branch 'checking' on the kernel.org tree. In a state of flux, so > > expect rebases. > > Did you forget to push that? I don't see it in any of: > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jdl/dtc.git > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/dtc/dtc.git > git://git.jdl.com/software/dtc.git Oops. Thought I'd pushed, but apparently not. Should be there now on: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/dtc/dtc.git -- 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 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: