Re: [RFC PATCH 15/15] Introduce v18 dtb version
"Luca Ceresoli" <[email protected]> Wed, 08 Apr 2026 09:55:37 +0200
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.devicetree-spec,org.kernel.vger.devicetree-compiler,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue Apr 7, 2026 at 6:44 PM CEST, Herve Codina wrote: > Hi Luca, > > On Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:19:09 +0200 > "Luca Ceresoli" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue Feb 10, 2026 at 6:33 PM CET, Herve Codina wrote: >> > This v18 version will add support for >> > - Structured tags. >> > Those tags value definition will allow old libfdt, dtc and other >> > tools to skip unknown tags if encountered in future dtb version. >> >> "old" seems to imply that versions released before today will be able to >> wkip unknown tags. I think this should be clarified along the lines of: >> >> libfdt, dtc and other tools implementing version v18 will be able to w= kip >> unknown tags in dtbs generated with later versions of dtc > > Yes, I will add this clarification in the next iteration. > >> >> > - dt_flags header field. >> > For now this flag field is set to 0. It is a placeholder for futur= e >> > dtb version and could be used to store some dtb related informatio= n >> > such as the kind of dtb. >> >> Is this intended for DT addons? >> >> You may mention a realistiv use case here. > > Intended, maybe not. Used by addons, yes, for sure. > > What do you think if I add the following: > For instance, the future addons format will use this field to > clearly identify that the dtb is an addon dtb. This clarifies a lot to me, so I think it can be added to the commit message. >> > Compared to previous version, it is worth noting that the dtb is not >> ^ >> "dtb version" >> >> > downgrade for all modification but only when unknown tags are removed >> ^ >> downgraded for any >> >> >> > due a property modification. >> ^ >> "due to a ..." >> >> I'm not sure I got what you mean by the initial "Compared to previous >> version". Version(s) of what? >> >> If I just remove those 4 words the sentence seems OK to me BTW. > > Is the following clearer? > > It is worth noting that with this v18 version, the dtb version is not > downgraded for any modification but only when unknown tags are remove= d > due to a property modification. In v17 or older version any modificat= ion > led to a dtb version downgrade. Yes, totally clear now, thanks! Luca -- Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com