On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:39 AM Neil Armstrong [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi Rob,

You forgot linux-amlogic in CC...

On 03/12/2018 22:32, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

Convert Amlogic SoC bindings to DT schema format using json-schema.

Cc: Carlo Caione <redacted>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
---

[...]

quoted

+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - amlogic,s400
+          - const: amlogic,a113d
+          - const: amlogic,meson-axg
+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - amlogic,u200
+          - const: amlogic,g12a

but all this feels wrong for me.

First of all, this yaml description is not human friendly and not intuitive at all,
and secondly with this conversion we loose all the comments about the SoC family relationship
with the compatible strings !

I really understand the point to have automated verification, but really it's a pain to read
(I can't imagine newcomers... the actual DT bindings are already hard to read...) and
I feel it will be a real pain to write !

What do you suggest that would be easier? Is it the YAML itself or the
json-schema vocabulary? For the former, we could use {} and [] to make
things more json style. But I imagine it is the latter.

There is some learning curve for json-schema and is certainly a
concern I have, but there would be a learning curve for anything. Our
choices are use some existing schema language or invent one. All the
previous efforts (there's been about 5 since 2013) have been inventing
one, and they've not gone far. There will be far few resources
available to train people with if we do something custom.

Can't we mix an "humam text" with a "yaml" part on a same document ? we are in 2018 (nearly 2019),
and it should be easy to extract a yaml description from a text document without pain and
keep all the human description, no ?

Yes. Please go look at the annotated example in patch 2.

What will be the case for all the bindings with ASCII art to describe the architecture of the
HW ? will you simply drop it to replace it with cold yaml description ?

No, you can have literal blocks and/or comments with however much
description you like. In fact, there's some notion to write the
descriptions in sphinx and extract them to generate documentation, but
that's a ways off. That's just the extent of what is possible.

Rob