On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 10:35:02AM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 at 15:39, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlow...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On 05/12/2023 10:45, Sumit Garg wrote: > > > + U-boot custodians list > > > > > > On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 at 12:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > <krzysztof.kozlow...@linaro.org> wrote: > > >> > > >> On 05/12/2023 08:13, Sumit Garg wrote: > > >>>>> @DT bindings maintainers, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Given the ease of maintenance of DT bindings within Linux kernel > > >>>>> source tree, I don't have a specific objection there. But can we ease > > >>>>> DTS testing for firmware/bootloader projects by providing a versioned > > >>>>> release package for DT bindings? Or if someone else has a better idea > > >>>>> here please feel free to chime in. > > >>>> > > >>>> This doesn't work for you?: > > >>>> > > >>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/devicetree/devicetree-rebasing.git/ > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, this is certainly a good step which I wasn't aware of. Further > > >>> simplification can be done to decouple devicetree source files from DT > > >>> bindings. > > >> > > >> Why? > > > > > > I suppose you are already aware that Linux DTS files are a subset of > > > what could be supported by devicetree schemas. There can be > > > firmware/bootloader specific properties (one example being [1]) which > > > Linux kernel can simply ignore. Will you be willing to add all of > > > those DT properties to Linux DTS files and maintain them? > > > > We already added them and we already maintain them. DTS describes the > > hardware, not the OS-subset of the hardware. > > Let look at some numbers if your statement is justified or not for the > example I gave: > > u-boot$ git grep -nr bootph-* arch/arm* | wc -l > 4079 > > linux$ git grep -nr bootph-* arch/arm* | wc -l > 267 > > It looks like there is always going to be a catch up game regarding DT > properties which either Linux kernel or u-boot or any other > firmware/bootloader project don't care about.
I want to chime in here just because that specific binding is both relatively new (and so platforms are working on upstreaming it now) and board-maintainers have gotten some feedback which has lead to: https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-dm/-/issues/12 that someone needs to have time to work on and that will in turn reduce the number of instances both in U-Boot and then upstream. It's also one of the first examples of properties not used directly in Linux but that is valid and so there was some initial back-and-forth on getting the dts(i) changes accepted to the kernel tree. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
