Kumar Gala wrote: > Until we meet the most basic level of properly describing 95% of the > HW I don't see the value you guys prescribe to FW compatibility. > Additionally I believe for embedded developers its perfectly > reasonable to expect them (if they are using u-boot) to possibly have > to update their .dts/dtb if they want to update their kernel.
That sounds like you want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Just because we can't get close to 100% representation of the hardware in the DTS, that does not mean that the representation we do have should be considered tenuous (for lack of a better word). We should *strive* to maintain backwards compatibility. If that means adding a few lines of isolated code every now and then, I don't see that as a bad thing at all. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
