DT dtc warnings

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Hi all,

Below is a current list of ARM boards with more than 40 dtc warnings
when building with W=1. There's a treewide patch in flight to fix some
unit-address warnings[1], so those aren't included here. The list is
grouped by maintainer. AT91, Exynos, and Allwinner continue to be at
the top of the list and have been for some time (though having
multiple boards for an SoC can cause lots of duplicated warnings).

50 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-arndale.dts
50 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-smdk5250.dts
50 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts
50 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow-rev5.dts
50 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-spring.dts
71 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-arndale-octa.dts
71 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts
71 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-smdk5420.dts
71 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5422-odroidhc1.dts
71 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5422-odroidxu3.dts
71 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5422-odroidxu3-lite.dts
71 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5422-odroidxu4.dts
71 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5800-peach-pi.dts

Sure, I can take care of this but in such case it would be better if
Mathieu's (+Cc) patch would be split per-subarch maintainer. I can
base my patch on top of his... but there might be conflicts when
applying to my tree.

Different topic - why not enabling these warnings by default?

Because the warning police don't like lots of warnings. Neither did
Linus, but he only sees the unittest ones[1]. The ones that are actual
binding errors rather than best practice are on by default.

The plan is to enable once the warnings are all gone.

Rob

[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg202057.html