I wrote a kernel driver with dtso file to define a device parameters. It works fine for me, I am proud of myself and all that...
But then I find a file in the sources /usr/src/sys/contrib/device-tree/Bindings/iio/light/bh1750.yaml which says:
But I have additional properties in my dtso file:
These properties set tunable values that I read from a bh1750 datasheet.
And I have a question (it is only one, not three
):
Is it bad to set the additional properties through an fdt-overlay at all?
I can rid all them from the dtso file to leave the compatible and reg ones only (They will still tunable through sysctl(8) and sysctl.conf(5) anyway). But should I?
Should I treat the files in /usr/src/sys/contrib/device-tree/Bindings/ as a strong recomendation... or they are just from another os, from another world?
But then I find a file in the sources /usr/src/sys/contrib/device-tree/Bindings/iio/light/bh1750.yaml which says:
YAML:
required:
- compatible
- reg
additionalProperties: false
JSON:
light-sensor@23 {
compatible = "rohm,bh1750";
reg = <0x23>;
/* MTreg = 69 by default for bh1750 */
mtreg = <0x45>;
/* Up to 50% if You need to increase ready-time */
quality-lack = <0>;
polling-time = <2>;
hres-mode = <2>;
status = "okay";
};And I have a question (it is only one, not three
):Is it bad to set the additional properties through an fdt-overlay at all?
I can rid all them from the dtso file to leave the compatible and reg ones only (They will still tunable through sysctl(8) and sysctl.conf(5) anyway). But should I?
Should I treat the files in /usr/src/sys/contrib/device-tree/Bindings/ as a strong recomendation... or they are just from another os, from another world?