Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:00:06 +1100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rockchip: Fix Hardkernel ODROID-M1 board bindings | From | Tim Lunn <> |
| |
Hi Heiko,
On 2/14/24 06:31, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > Hi Tim, > > Am Mittwoch, 17. Januar 2024, 11:03:26 CET schrieb Tim Lunn: >> On 1/17/24 06:55, Heiko Stübner wrote: >>> Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 20:26:05 CET schrieb Rob Herring: >>>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 09:31:35AM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: >>>>> Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2024, 08:24:44 CET schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: >>>>>> On 16/01/2024 03:00, Tim Lunn wrote: >>>>>>> On 1/16/24 01:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>>>>> On 15/01/2024 15:51, KyuHyuk Lee wrote: >>>>>>>>> The vendor in ODROID-M1 is hardkernel, but it was incorrectly written >>>>>>>>> as rockchip. Fixed the vendor prefix correctly. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: KyuHyuk Lee <lee@kyuhyuk.kr> >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +- >>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>>>> You need to start testing your patches. Your last M1 fails as well in >>>>>>>> multiple places. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run >>>>>>>> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see >>>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or >>>>>>>> https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/ >>>>>>>> for instructions). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The DTS change will break the users, so would be nice to mention this in >>>>>>>> its commit msg. >>>>>>> I notice there are a couple of other boards that incorrectly use >>>>>>> rockchip as the vendor also: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - const: rockchip,rk3399-orangepi >>>>>>> - const: rockchip,rk3568-bpi-r2pro >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps these should also be fixed at the same time? >>>>>> What is happening with rockchip boards? >>>>> Copy-paste stuff ... boards using rockchip,boardname instead of >>>>> vendor,boardname for their compatible. >>>>> >>>>> I do remember us noticing this a number of times on some boards >>>>> and requesting fixes, but looks like some slipped through. >>>>> >>>>> So I guess Tim is suggesting changing the compatible, but with boards >>>>> being merged a while ago, this would break backwards compatibility. >>>>> So I guess both the Orange and Banana Pies will need to live with that. >>>> You may get away with it because we generally don't use the names... >>>> >>>> Though there are some discussions to start using them to select dtbs by >>>> bootloaders. >>> Ah, that's good to know (both points) ... so essentially right now would be >>> a good time to do what Tim suggested, before the names get actual usage. >>> >>> @Tim: is that something you'd want to do? >>> >> Sure, I will prepare patches and send them out soon. > As I stumbled upon this patch just now, how is that coming along? :-)
Thanks for the reminder, I will send them now ;)
Regards Tim
> > Thanks > Heiko > >
| |