On 10/10/2012 8:40 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:

On 10/10/2012 11:09 AM, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On 10/09/2012 04:16 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:

quoted

On 10/01/2012 12:39 PM, Jon Loeliger wrote:

quoted

quoted

What more do you think needs discussion re: dtc+cpp?

How not to abuse the ever-loving shit out of it? :-)

Perhaps we can just handle this through the regular patch review
process; I think it may be difficult to define and agree upon exactly
what "abuse" means ahead of time, but it's probably going to be easy
enough to recognize it when one sees it?

Rather than repeating things over and over in reviews, we should
document at least rules we can easily agree on and then add to it when
people get "creative." Also, I can't keep up with every single binding
review as is, and this could just add another level of complexity to the
review. A few off the top of my head and from the thread discussion:

- Headers must be self contained with no outside (i.e. libc, kernel,
etc.) header dependencies.
- No kernel kconfig option usage
- No gcc built-in define usage
- No unused items (i.e. externs, structs, etc.)

quoted

- No macro concatenation

That seems to be potentially a very useful feature; I have no idea why
we would ban that; it isn't banned in C code in the kernel is it?

It's used in the kernel.  It is useful, but it has an unexpected side
effect that can be extremely annoying - it can make it extremely
difficult to find a definition with grep.  All the grep hits will be for
the fully-expanded uses of a symbol, while the definition is "hidden" by
virtue of being synthesized by concatenation.

Maybe it's not a big deal in a small project, but in a code base the
size of the Linux kernel, where you don't know a priori where something
is defined, it can make you want to tear your hair out.

quoted

- No macros for strings or property names

Property names I can understand. Property values - I can perhaps see a
use-case for...

_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss