On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 07:16:07PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > What does it take? Good practice, care, thought and planning. All > the qualities which should already be present for kernel _engineers_. > Not an "lets create something for me, I don't care about anyone else" > attitude.
I agree with what you've written, but we are looking at this from different ends of the problem. I fully agree you can create a main line kernel GIT tree that has a stable DT ABI. However, I as an ODM, with time pressure, cannot wait for the kernel folks to finish this work. So from my perspective the DT will not be stable, as I will put whatever interm stuff I choose to have a shippable product. Thus I have to design my systems for an unstable DT, and the message from the kernel community to people in my posistion should be: When you ship early with non-mainlined DT schema, design your boot system around an unstable DT. Plan to migrate your DT to upstream once it becomes finalized. Here is the rub: Once I design for an unstable DT I simply don't derive value from the kernel communities work to create a stable DT. So who is getting the benefit of this work, and is it worth the cost? Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
