Neil Williams neil.williams@linaro.org writes:
Yes, absolutely, having extra device types supported in the codebase makes it easier for others using LAVA, even if those devices are not currently present in the Cambridge lab. (The Cambridge lab generally reflects the priorities of member companies in Linaro, so manufacturers outside Linaro are rarely represented.)
(This needs to be a section in the documentation.)
Naming conventions need to consider these factors:
0: the device-type name needs to be resolvable in the URL, so avoid characters that would need URL quoting, especially whitespace. 1: current device types are all lowercase, there could be hidden assumptions about lookups being case-insensitive, so it is likely best to keep names lowercase 2: The description field is lab-specific, so this can be used to put a free text description on the device type pages. 3: A quick check of other labs can be informative, e.g. kernelci, lava.collabora.co.uk
For kernelCI we strongly prefer that the device-type matches exactly the DT name in the upstream kernel sources.
Kevin