[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <67a6564a-00bb-461d-b7eb-ca169df6d251@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 12:40:02 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>,
peter.griffin@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
tudor.ambarus@...aro.org, willmcvicker@...gle.com,
semen.protsenko@...aro.org, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: exynos: gs101: add stable i2c aliases for
gs101-oriole
On 12/02/2024 12:30, André Draszik wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-02-12 at 12:18 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> I can drop it, but the actual problem is that what if downstream keeps
>> changing aliases? They can do it...
>
> We won't care at that stage, downstream should have no reason to divert from
> upstream for numbering at some point in the future.
What do you mean by "no reason"? The reason is they can do whatever they
want. Some project leader says: "I want this" and they will do it. They
won't care about our upstream choice at all.
And then what, you change it again?
If downstream was caring, then they could pick as well aliases which we
already committed.
To remind: the downstream was released 3 years ago! So the downstream
DTS is long past "beta" phase and should be considered stable. If they
keep changing the aliases after three years, then they can keep doing it
for next 20 years.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists