[PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[KyuHyuk Lee]

The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.

Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
index 5cf5cbef2cf5..869abf6bcfe6 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
@@ -563,7 +563,7 @@ properties:
 
       - description: Hardkernel Odroid M1
         items:
-          - const: rockchip,rk3568-odroid-m1
+          - const: hardkernel,rk3568-odroid-m1
           - const: rockchip,rk3568
 
       - description: Hugsun X99 TV Box
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
multiple places.

It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
`make dtbs_check W=1` (see
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
for instructions).

The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
its commit msg.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[KyuHyuk Lee]

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 03:58:56PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
> > The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
> > as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
> multiple places.
> 
> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
> for instructions).
> 
> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
> its commit msg.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

Hello, Krzysztof.

I am truly sorry for wasting your time due to my mistake.
From now on, i will carefully send PATCH with testing.
I'm really sorry.

Thank you,
KyuHyuk Lee.

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Tim Lunn]

On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
> multiple places.
>
> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
> for instructions).
>
> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
> its commit msg.

I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use 
rockchip as the vendor also:

           - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi
           - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro

Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time?

Regards
   Tim

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 16/01/2024 03:00, Tim Lunn wrote:
> 
> On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
>>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
>>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
>>> ---
>>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
>> multiple places.
>>
>> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
>> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
>> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
>> for instructions).
>>
>> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
>> its commit msg.
> 
> I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use 
> rockchip as the vendor also:
> 
>            - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi
>            - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro
> 
> Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time?

What is happening with rockchip boards?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 08:24:44 CET schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
> On 16/01/2024 03:00, Tim Lunn wrote:
> > 
> > On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
> >>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
> >>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
> >>> ---
> >>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
> >>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
> >> multiple places.
> >>
> >> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
> >> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
> >> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
> >> for instructions).
> >>
> >> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
> >> its commit msg.
> > 
> > I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use 
> > rockchip as the vendor also:
> > 
> >            - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi
> >            - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro
> > 
> > Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time?
> 
> What is happening with rockchip boards?

Copy-paste stuff ... boards using rockchip,boardname instead of
vendor,boardname for their compatible.

I do remember us noticing this a number of times on some boards
and requesting fixes, but looks like some slipped through.

So I guess Tim is suggesting changing the compatible, but with boards
being merged a while ago, this would break backwards compatibility.
So I guess both the Orange and Banana Pies will need to live with that.

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 09:31:35AM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 08:24:44 CET schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
> > On 16/01/2024 03:00, Tim Lunn wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > >> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
> > >>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
> > >>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
> > >>> ---
> > >>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
> > >>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
> > >> multiple places.
> > >>
> > >> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
> > >> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
> > >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
> > >> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
> > >> for instructions).
> > >>
> > >> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
> > >> its commit msg.
> > > 
> > > I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use 
> > > rockchip as the vendor also:
> > > 
> > >            - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi
> > >            - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro
> > > 
> > > Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time?
> > 
> > What is happening with rockchip boards?
> 
> Copy-paste stuff ... boards using rockchip,boardname instead of
> vendor,boardname for their compatible.
> 
> I do remember us noticing this a number of times on some boards
> and requesting fixes, but looks like some slipped through.
> 
> So I guess Tim is suggesting changing the compatible, but with boards
> being merged a while ago, this would break backwards compatibility.
> So I guess both the Orange and Banana Pies will need to live with that.

You may get away with it because we generally don't use the names...

Though there are some discussions to start using them to select dtbs by 
bootloaders.

Rob

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 20:26:05 CET schrieb Rob Herring:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 09:31:35AM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 08:24:44 CET schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
> > > On 16/01/2024 03:00, Tim Lunn wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > >> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
> > > >>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
> > > >>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
> > > >>> ---
> > > >>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
> > > >>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
> > > >> multiple places.
> > > >>
> > > >> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
> > > >> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
> > > >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
> > > >> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
> > > >> for instructions).
> > > >>
> > > >> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
> > > >> its commit msg.
> > > > 
> > > > I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use 
> > > > rockchip as the vendor also:
> > > > 
> > > >            - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi
> > > >            - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro
> > > > 
> > > > Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time?
> > > 
> > > What is happening with rockchip boards?
> > 
> > Copy-paste stuff ... boards using rockchip,boardname instead of
> > vendor,boardname for their compatible.
> > 
> > I do remember us noticing this a number of times on some boards
> > and requesting fixes, but looks like some slipped through.
> > 
> > So I guess Tim is suggesting changing the compatible, but with boards
> > being merged a while ago, this would break backwards compatibility.
> > So I guess both the Orange and Banana Pies will need to live with that.
> 
> You may get away with it because we generally don't use the names...
> 
> Though there are some discussions to start using them to select dtbs by 
> bootloaders.

Ah, that's good to know (both points) ... so essentially right now would be
a good time to do what Tim suggested, before the names get actual usage.

@Tim: is that something you'd want to do?


Thanks
Heiko

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Tim Lunn]

On 1/17/24 06:55, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 20:26:05 CET schrieb Rob Herring:
>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 09:31:35AM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
>>> Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 08:24:44 CET schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
>>>> On 16/01/2024 03:00, Tim Lunn wrote:
>>>>> On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
>>>>>>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
>>>>>>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>>>>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
>>>>>> multiple places.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
>>>>>> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
>>>>>> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
>>>>>> for instructions).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
>>>>>> its commit msg.
>>>>> I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use
>>>>> rockchip as the vendor also:
>>>>>
>>>>>             - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi
>>>>>             - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time?
>>>> What is happening with rockchip boards?
>>> Copy-paste stuff ... boards using rockchip,boardname instead of
>>> vendor,boardname for their compatible.
>>>
>>> I do remember us noticing this a number of times on some boards
>>> and requesting fixes, but looks like some slipped through.
>>>
>>> So I guess Tim is suggesting changing the compatible, but with boards
>>> being merged a while ago, this would break backwards compatibility.
>>> So I guess both the Orange and Banana Pies will need to live with that.
>> You may get away with it because we generally don't use the names...
>>
>> Though there are some discussions to start using them to select dtbs by
>> bootloaders.
> Ah, that's good to know (both points) ... so essentially right now would be
> a good time to do what Tim suggested, before the names get actual usage.
>
> @Tim: is that something you'd want to do?
>
Sure, I will prepare patches and send them out soon.
> Thanks
> Heiko
>
>
>

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Heiko Stuebner]

Hi Tim,

Am Mittwoch, 17. Januar 2024, 11:03:26 CET schrieb Tim Lunn:
> On 1/17/24 06:55, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 20:26:05 CET schrieb Rob Herring:
> >> On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 09:31:35AM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> >>> Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 08:24:44 CET schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
> >>>> On 16/01/2024 03:00, Tim Lunn wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>>> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
> >>>>>>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
> >>>>>>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
> >>>>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>>> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
> >>>>>> multiple places.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
> >>>>>> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
> >>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
> >>>>>> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
> >>>>>> for instructions).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
> >>>>>> its commit msg.
> >>>>> I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use
> >>>>> rockchip as the vendor also:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>             - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi
> >>>>>             - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time?
> >>>> What is happening with rockchip boards?
> >>> Copy-paste stuff ... boards using rockchip,boardname instead of
> >>> vendor,boardname for their compatible.
> >>>
> >>> I do remember us noticing this a number of times on some boards
> >>> and requesting fixes, but looks like some slipped through.
> >>>
> >>> So I guess Tim is suggesting changing the compatible, but with boards
> >>> being merged a while ago, this would break backwards compatibility.
> >>> So I guess both the Orange and Banana Pies will need to live with that.
> >> You may get away with it because we generally don't use the names...
> >>
> >> Though there are some discussions to start using them to select dtbs by
> >> bootloaders.
> > Ah, that's good to know (both points) ... so essentially right now would be
> > a good time to do what Tim suggested, before the names get actual usage.
> >
> > @Tim: is that something you'd want to do?
> >
> Sure, I will prepare patches and send them out soon.

As I stumbled upon this patch just now, how is that coming along? :-)

Thanks
Heiko

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings

[Tim Lunn]

Hi Heiko,

On 2/14/24 06:31, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> Am Mittwoch, 17. Januar 2024, 11:03:26 CET schrieb Tim Lunn:
>> On 1/17/24 06:55, Heiko Stübner wrote:
>>> Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 20:26:05 CET schrieb Rob Herring:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 09:31:35AM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
>>>>> Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 08:24:44 CET schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
>>>>>> On 16/01/2024 03:00, Tim Lunn wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written
>>>>>>>>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>>>>>>>>>     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in
>>>>>>>> multiple places.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
>>>>>>>> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
>>>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
>>>>>>>> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/
>>>>>>>> for instructions).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in
>>>>>>>> its commit msg.
>>>>>>> I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use
>>>>>>> rockchip as the vendor also:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi
>>>>>>>              - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time?
>>>>>> What is happening with rockchip boards?
>>>>> Copy-paste stuff ... boards using rockchip,boardname instead of
>>>>> vendor,boardname for their compatible.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do remember us noticing this a number of times on some boards
>>>>> and requesting fixes, but looks like some slipped through.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I guess Tim is suggesting changing the compatible, but with boards
>>>>> being merged a while ago, this would break backwards compatibility.
>>>>> So I guess both the Orange and Banana Pies will need to live with that.
>>>> You may get away with it because we generally don't use the names...
>>>>
>>>> Though there are some discussions to start using them to select dtbs by
>>>> bootloaders.
>>> Ah, that's good to know (both points) ... so essentially right now would be
>>> a good time to do what Tim suggested, before the names get actual usage.
>>>
>>> @Tim: is that something you'd want to do?
>>>
>> Sure, I will prepare patches and send them out soon.
> As I stumbled upon this patch just now, how is that coming along? :-)


Thanks for the reminder, I will send them now ;)

Regards
   Tim

>
> Thanks
> Heiko
>
>