Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove bogus errors from check_chosen.

From: Jerry Van Baren <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:48:30 -0400

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