[PATCH] Remove bogus errors from check_chosen.

Jerry Van Baren gerald.vanbaren at smiths-aerospace.com
Sat Mar 24 02:48:30 EST 2007


Scott Wood wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 11:21:27AM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
>> The -q[q[q]] I added cuts down/eliminates the moaning, but you still 
>> have to -f force the output which doesn't match what Scott is advocating 
>> if I understand him.
>>
>> The gcc -Wall is backwards to what we should have, perhaps adding --no* 
>> options like:
>>   --nochosen
>>   --nocpu
>>   --noarmyboots
>> to tell dtc that lonely barefoot blobs are OK.
> 
> There should also be a --no-validate option to turn everything off, if
> the user is confident that the tree is right and doesn't want to get
> broken by new dtcs that have new error categories (or if the user is
> using dtc to compile some other type of tree than an OF-ish device tree).
> 
> In other words, there should be a clear separation between the structural
> layer and the semantic layer, even if the same binary can do both.
> 
> -Scott

Unless I'm missing an error scenario (entirely possible), --no-validate 
is nothing more than
   -f -qqq
which forces the output and quiets the moaning.  Just not as pretty...

I would still advocate being able to disable individual warning/errors. 
For instance, for u-boot, the chosen (and other) nodes are generated by 
u-boot so it is OK to not have them in the source.  If something new 
comes along that _is_ needed, and I would feel better if only the chosen 
node warning was suppressed and dtc _would_ complain about the new 
missing node.

Either way you pick it there will be hypothetical, and probably 
eventually real, scenarios the that wrong choice will be made.

gvb



More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list