Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] dt-bindings: watchdog: factor out RZ/V2H(P) watchdog

[wsa+renesas <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1521 bytes --]

Hi Geert,

> We do have "fallback" comments in other places, and I think they do
> help in understanding compatible naming schemes.

Still, dunno...

> Would it be possible to handle this in dt-schema?
> Currently we have to write:
> 
>       - const: vendor,soc1-ip
> 
>       - items:
>           - enum:
>               - vendor,soc2-ip
>               - vendor,soc3-ip
>           - const: vendor,soc1-ip       # fallback

... I think '- items' makes it clear that later entries are fallback
entries. I am by no means a YAML master but this knowledge should/could
be expected? If peolpe don't know that...

What really is confusing, I'd say, is a mixture of entries with
fallbacks and without. One can overlook this easily. So, they should be
grouped IMHO. That's my previous suggestion.

> If dt-schema would automatically drop duplicates of the fallback,
> we could just write:
> 
>       - items:
>           - enum:
>               - vendor,soc1-ip
>               - vendor,soc2-ip
>               - vendor,soc3-ip
>           - const: vendor,soc1-ip       # fallback
> 
> What do you think?

(soc1 should be omitted from the enum)

Do you mean "# fallback" indicates that the fallback entry should be
created? Or just the const item?

Well, this is ultimately DT maintainers call, but my gut feeling says it
is better to be explicit than implicit. I do understand that the more
compact binding documentation would be a gain, though.

All the best,

   Wolfram


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]