> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Grant Likely > Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 1:54 AM > To: Wood Scott > Cc: Li Yang; linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] add default device trees for MPC837x > MDS board > > On 1/8/08, Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 08:58:17AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: > > > On 1/7/08, Li Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > + phy_type = "utmi_wide"; > > > > > > fsl,phy_type please. > > > > Again, code will break. Can we stop ambushing people > submitting board > > support with complaints against existing, non-board-specific > > code/device trees? Fix that first, then complain if new > code reintroduces the crud. > > I disagree (about bringing up these comments). New board > port is the time to bring these issue up. It keeps the issue > in the forefront so it actually gets fixed.
Hi, I agree that it's good to bring these issues up for a better standarized device tree definition. It will be even better if the guidelines are documented rather than nuncupated on the mail list. However, I think that adding new board support is independent of fixing preexistent issues. I do prefer to fix these issues together with other occurrences by separated patches rather than respin the new board support over and over again. - Leo _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
