[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOesGMi=xBXTdMm+-yTRVVFf0VR-7gy6xTrdeAupyo7OWVb3iQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:32:04 -0700
From: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
Cc: "Gupta, Pekon" <pekon@...com>,
"benoit.cousson@...aro.org" <benoit.cousson@...aro.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"tony@...mide.com" <tony@...mide.com>,
"avinashphilipk@...il.com" <avinashphilipk@...il.com>,
"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
"dedekind1@...il.com" <dedekind1@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Balbi, Felipe" <balbi@...com>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] ARM: OMAP2+: cleaned-up DT support of various ECC schemes
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Brian Norris
<computersforpeace@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 01:33:27PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Brian Norris
>> <computersforpeace@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Olof has given good advice on your DT binding and has (slowly) been
>> > responding to other requests for DT review that make it to his list. I
>> > see that he hasn't followed up on your changes (this v6), so pinging him
>> > (as you did) is probably the correct approach. But please do recognize
>> > that the DT list is very high volume, so it's hard to get good timely
>> > responses there.
>>
>> I am not a DT mainainer, but sometimes when I see a binding that
>> appears to be wrong I speak up. In this case, the binding was one of
>> those.
>
> Whoops, my bad. I was deceived by the responses I've seen from you on
> other issues (thanks, BTW). In that case, I haven't seen any response
> from a proper DT binding maintainer :(
>
>> So, I have no more objections to it, and I hope you can get a quick
>> review from a DT maintainer on the rest of the binding.
>
> At this point, I'm comfortable going ahead without their ack, since they
> obviously don't care/don't have the manpower to review.
No, that is not how we handle device tree bindings. They need to be
reviewed, since we are moving over to a model where they will be
considered ABI and can't be changed after the fact. We have a long
backlog of mostly-unreviewed old bindings that we're going to do a
pass through and then lock down, but it would be good to not add to
that backlog with newer bindings.
In other words, there's a strong desire for actual acks on bindings
from those maintainers these days.
-Olof
--
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