From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tixy@linaro.org (Jon Medhurst (Tixy))
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 16:08:53 +0000
Subject: [PATCH 3/6] arm64: dts: Add a devicetree for the ARMv8 4xA53
 4xA57 FVP
In-Reply-To: <20131211150433.GD17681@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <1386767606-6391-1-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org>
 <1386767606-6391-3-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org>
 <20131211135536.GC17681@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20131211141148.GV11468@sirena.org.uk>
 <20131211150433.GD17681@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Message-ID: <1386778133.3447.6.camel@linaro1.home>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 15:04 +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 02:11:48PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 01:55:36PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 01:13:23PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
[...]
> > 
> > > > +/ {
> > > > +	model = "FVP Base";
> > 
> > > FVP Base (is as the name implies) a base upon which particular model
> > > instances are built. This name should be clarified (e.g. "FVP Base A57x4
> > > A53x4").
> > 
> > > That also applies to the filename.
> > 
> > I can update these, though they do seem to come from what you guys are
> > releasing - you might want to follow up on this internally (this applies
> > to almost all of your review comments, sorry).  It's probably going to
> > be a bit confusing for users to have the filename change but ho hum :/
> 
> I'll try to chase up the issues, thanks for making me aware.
> 
> I don't see the name issue as a big problem. This DT has never been part
> of the kernel tree, so there's no filename compatibility issue to deal
> with. Existing users of the DT will already have to be modified to get
> the DTs from a new source.
> 
> There should be nothing hanging off the compatible string for the
> platform yet -- we have no board files or platform blobs in the arm64
> port. If the model name is being used as anything other than a handy
> indicator to users, then that's broken anyway.

I believe Android uses model names to determine the filenames of init
scripts to run. That's not a kernel problem, but thought I would point
out one 'broken' use that I have first hand experience of, having been
tripped up before by ARM's twice yearly lets-rename-everything-again
exercise ;-)

-- 
Tixy