Re: [PATCH v5 07/11] dt-bindings: test: Add single clk consumer

[Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>]

Quoting Rob Herring (2024-06-04 06:05:26)
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 03:38:04PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Describe a binding for a device that consumes a single clk in DT. This
> > will initially be used by a KUnit test to clk_get() the clk registered
> > by of_fixed_clk_setup() and test that it is setup properly.
> > 
> > Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>
> > Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> > Cc: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  .../test/test,single-clk-consumer.yaml        | 34 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/test/test,single-clk-consumer.yaml
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/test/test,single-clk-consumer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/test/test,single-clk-consumer.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..8c384c48707d
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/test/test,single-clk-consumer.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/test/test,single-clk-consumer.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: Test consumer of a single clock
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > +  - Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
> > +
> > +description:
> > +  A consumer of a single clock used in tests.
> > +
> > +properties:
> > +  compatible:
> > +    const: test,single-clk-consumer
> 
> I don't know if there's much value in defining bindings for tests. We 
> could alternatively make 'test,' opt out of everything. There's already 
> some support in dtschema for this with 'foo,'.
> 
> I need something for the DT unittest as well. 
> 

Ok. So I should drop this patch and the other one that adds a binding
for the fake clock provider? And replace it with something that makes
the test vendor prefix opt out of all checking? How is that done?  Some
patch to dtschema directly?