linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] DT bindings as ABI [was: Do we have people interested in device tree janitoring / cleanup?]

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:40:18 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc:	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
	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>,
	Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@...il.com>,
	"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	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: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] DT bindings as ABI [was: Do we have
 people interested in device tree janitoring / cleanup?]

On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:48:26AM +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:

> [ I disagree about the "more thought" part. The current discussion,
>   coming years too late after the introduction of DT to ARM Linux, is
>   contrary evidence enough. ]

We did have exactly the same discussion when the DT transition was
started - this isn't something that people only just realised might be
an issue.  There was a deliberate decision to focus on getting the
technology deployed to the point where it could be used as a straight
replacement for board files and accept that sometimes the results won't
be perfect and that we may need to rework as a result.

To be clear the idea has always been to try for bindings that can be
stable but we didn't have the process to guarantee that and there were
substantial barriers in place to creating it while there was no critical
mass behind adoption.  What people are saying now is that we're now at a
point where it looks like those barriers can be overcome.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)