From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 363ECC433E0 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 01:52:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A9020780 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 01:52:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1593481966; bh=wkNs6nVy0bQpGGNSvXZEm1u8oAdelr54dfLGB7PYB+U=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=CyBm8VQgyZcMKplg8dk6GaEFTXX1Ukrt9qQY74Dqnv3/kAgXC1abzYX40Xp8mZ9cN VMLlOKItdLKngU74mvR5naD7/fV4zoBG7jUHNhUUSicuJNT9agzGwvE58svJOHzGAX Kkl4b14MMaUVOokX9iXeP6onEWvnYlyjlhJDTrto= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728647AbgF3Bwo (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jun 2020 21:52:44 -0400 Received: from conssluserg-04.nifty.com ([210.131.2.83]:60299 "EHLO conssluserg-04.nifty.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726003AbgF3Bwo (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jun 2020 21:52:44 -0400 Received: from mail-ua1-f45.google.com (mail-ua1-f45.google.com [209.85.222.45]) (authenticated) by conssluserg-04.nifty.com with ESMTP id 05U1qCct029907; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:52:13 +0900 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 conssluserg-04.nifty.com 05U1qCct029907 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nifty.com; s=dec2015msa; t=1593481933; bh=pzUnP+Gd/o71cSKBNMVmFDAQhku4dhuHdwm+GTsm+dQ=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=Z/YKjt+0I8CwnlcfGXxiM76xxMtgFODo0Udz4VqTd6CKBsUlq7XA5yMEetuHdo/pW 3HgcfiV3FXbjk4H5APsgullI7XFlYZH390On8SQhyFpcoeIOjG2bMcCSVFbhJbIX3E 8+db+cuS2ytCwlhWgryth1k4QWye5Q8yR8L73VqlvFzs/OnXZVGNWTrtGffqyan/T3 c3xglyXCTMosaiY9EyEDWn++HE/rzV/+ACOEa7SP4b/bjLp9cOc6bnK8Izc4lPALRH HVDYxsOgzIBea+GDhgLewH6bLT/SjbM528NNV6UkbcQMIkoCuux6e8hwAy+x1SZpNg IS0m+3H8FlYIw== X-Nifty-SrcIP: [209.85.222.45] Received: by mail-ua1-f45.google.com with SMTP id c7so4503116uap.0; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 18:52:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53041HppmKQUPQD8jyxOk3j3WiJgB8pqz53RbYKOvlskWLVVRdMq wSy0CKfTkxtBO4vAfs6JIi8Jybxu4aQpAN+rbrI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx34KgJOS3yCKldjTe3z4RlrwFHHKAIReVcj4g+8cBmyLg1qxOv+ce1XT52RH9evjclhDuFnFDuKvDgX3lnJiU= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:156d:: with SMTP id p42mr12963596uae.121.1593481932354; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 18:52:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200625170434.635114-1-masahiroy@kernel.org> <20200625170434.635114-5-masahiroy@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: From: Masahiro Yamada Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:51:34 +0900 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] dt-bindings: split DT schema check rules To: Rob Herring Cc: DTML , Frank Rowand , Linux Kbuild mailing list , Michal Marek , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 5:50 AM Rob Herring wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:05 AM Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > > When building %.dt.yaml from %.dts, two things happen in a row: > > > > [1] Run DTC to convert %.dts into %.dt.yaml > > > > [2] Run dt-validate against %.dt.yaml > > > > Currently, when any .yaml schema file is updated, processed-schema.yaml > > is regenerated, then both [1] and [2] are rerun for all .dts files. > > > > Actually, we do not need to rerun [1] since the original .dts is not > > updated. > > I have plans (and an intern working on it) to integrate the schema > checks into dtc. That's going to make turning on the schema checks > just a flag to dtc. I'm not sure if adding the complexity here is > worth it as I'd expect much of this patch to go away again. > > Is there any negative impact on the absolute clean build time? I'm > more concerned about that than optimizing rerunning. No benefit on the absolute clean build time. OK, then please skip this patch. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada