[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130726080115.GA5436@netboy>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 10:01:15 +0200
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org"
<ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@...il.com>,
"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: DT bindings as ABI [was: Do we have people interested in device
tree janitoring / cleanup?]
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 03:37:53PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> We use DT has a kernel configuration input. Our environment is
> designed to guarantee 100% that the kernel and DT match exactly. DT
> very deliberately isn't an ABI boundary in our systems.
Think about what you just said.
The DT describes the *hardware* not the kernel. Why should you ever
need to update your DT at all?
(Hint: the answer is, because the DT system is broken.)
Thanks,
Richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists