On Apr 22, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
Scott Wood wrote:
Timur Tabi wrote:
these two are related and seem like we could look for
"fsl,cpm2"
That's okay, as long as you don't break compatibility with older
device trees that don't have that property, unless you can
demonstrate
that these trees would never work with the current kernel anyway.
All CPM2 device trees should have fsl,cpm2 listed in the compatible
of
the CPM node.
Yes, but did they always have that compatible field? I'm concerned
about situations where someone updates his kernel but not his device
tree. This is a scenerio that we always need to try to support.
I disagree. If you update your kernel you should update your device
tree (thus we have .dts in the kernel tree and not somewhere else).
- k
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
