"Adrian Schmutzler" <m...@adrianschmutzler.de> writes: > However, I wonder whether - strictly - these parameter belong into > device tree, i.e. "describe the hardware". (this is meant as an open > question, I do not want to express any rejection with that)
FWIW, I believe it does in the same way the existing compatible properties do. They are a description of the expected image format on that partition. And the knowledge of this format is shared with the boot loader. > And probably we would need to involve upstream (devicetree-spec) for > the naming of the properties? Or is this irrelevant as > mtdsplit_uimage is just "our stuff" anyway? My impression is that mtdsplit_uimage is not intended to go upstream. But I could be wrong there? Anyway, I believe it's a good idea in any case to stick to upstream guidelines if possible. Reading https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.html I see that I have made a few grave errors... The properties are "device specific", if we consider that a "device" in this context is the "uimage" partition. The properties will not be shared with any other partition "devices". This means that the properties should have a vendor prefix. It is probably not a good idea to mess with the "denx" namespace, so I am tempted to make this "openwrt,ih-magic" etc, and use a separate compatible string for that. E.g "openwrt,uimage". So you would have something like partition@300000 { label = "firmware"; compatible = "openwrt,uimage", "denx,uimage"; openwrt,ih-magic = <0x4e474520>; reg = <0x00300000 0xe80000>; }; Without defining a separate parser for that, Just a second compatible string for the match table. Possibly with a of_device_is_compatible() test to ignore the openwrt properties for pure "denx,uimage" partitions. But then I found this discussion about "openwrt,fit-firmware" vs "denx,fit": http://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2018-December/021004.html If we stick to the conclusion of that discussion, then we will stick to "denx,uimage". And I guess the properties should be "denx,ih-magic" etc. Which I do feel a bit uncomfortable. One thing is abusing a name defined by someone else. Another is stealing parts of their namespace. What do you say? Is the "openwrt,fit-firmware" discussion still valid? Bjørn _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
