On Wednesday 13 of November 2013 19:49:15 Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 07:24:04PM +0100, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Well, the label is just for the parser and it does not get into the DTB. This is where the DTS author can make things up just for their own convenience (like main_codec, aux_codec or even cs42l52).
If only we could have comments :)
Comments in DTB? That would be at least interesting. ;)
I know this is really more bikeshedding than anything useful, but I'd rather try to follow the written rules in ePAPR, instead of nothing at all. At least just to make things more consistent.
My feeling here is that we should be looking more critically at ePAPR - if we're picking people up for having what's essentially a comment that's too specific we're probably doing something wrong especially since the corrected example would look something like:
codec: codec@12 {
which is a bit redundant.
Still, this is not a comment, because it's also available in the resulting binary representation.
Well, maybe I'm a bit too strict. I wouldn't probably notice this if I didn't have other comments, so let's say that was just a nitpick of mine, fixing of which doesn't cost anything, since another version will have to be spinned anyway.
Best regards, Tomasz