On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 10:14 PM, jonsm...@gmail.com <jonsm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yes, yes - that's why the schema should be written down and used as a > validation input to dtc. Then dtc can spit out errors for non-standard > items. There would be two versions - the standard one and a legacy one > that includes the standard one plus the hacks that can't be undone. > > But more importantly it provides a framework for people creating new > node definitions. Now they can't work in a vacuum and come up with > random names and structure for everything. > > Most of the problems express in the thread would go away if the schema > was written down and discussed. The rule going forward would be no new > nodes that aren't part of the standard schema.
+1. If we want to keep the schema stable, it has to be defined and described explicitly with one language, just like syscall ABI: C type/API exported to userspace header file. Thanks, -- Ming Lei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
