From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julia Lawall Subject: Re: device tree verification tools Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:08:50 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <581CE982.60605@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: devicetree-spec-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Grant Likely Cc: Frank Rowand , Matt Porter , Behan Webster , Rob Herring , David Gibson , Pantelis Antoniou , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , devicetree-spec-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 4 Nov 2016, Grant Likely wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Frank Rowand wrote: > > On 07/26/16 13:43, Julia Lawall wrote: > >> I saw that there will be a microconference on device trees at Linux > >> Plumbers. Unfortunately, I won't be able to attend, due to another event > >> at the same time, but I was wondering what is the status of verification > >> tools for device tree specifications? > >> > >> thanks, > >> julia > >> > > > > Hi Julia, > > > > Grant Likely is breathing new life into the verification effort. > > Hey Julia, > > The status is: there are no verification tools for dt. :-) > > I'm /hoping/ to fix that. I've started experimenting with a grammar > for DT schema and writing a schema validation tool, but this isn't my > domain of expertise. I could certainly use your insight. You can see > some of what I've been playing with in this git tree: > > https://github.com/glikely/dtgendoc > > It is little more than prototype code, and nothing has been formalized > yet. I'm open to taking other approaches. Thanks for the pointer. I haven't had a chance to look into it, but I hope to get to it soon. julia > > Cheers, > g. > > > > > > -Frank >