From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thierry.reding@gmail.com (Thierry Reding) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:58:56 +0200 Subject: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] ARM topic: Is DT on ARM the solution, or is there something better? In-Reply-To: <818aaae744e58e37c6641d41912d0ba2.squirrel@twosheds.infradead.org> References: <20131024095232.27BBCC4039D@trevor.secretlab.ca> <1382614439.6040.16.camel@sakura.staff.proxad.net> <1382615278.8522.72.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20131024122346.GD11296@ulmo.nvidia.com> <1382619655.6040.52.camel@sakura.staff.proxad.net> <516bfc7f9366ff3ef9187c36dd160888.squirrel@twosheds.infradead.org> <20131024141241.GA25061@ulmo.nvidia.com> <99db70b50b3ddcf20d940d5855c657e0.squirrel@twosheds.infradead.org> <20131024142347.GD25061@ulmo.nvidia.com> <818aaae744e58e37c6641d41912d0ba2.squirrel@twosheds.infradead.org> Message-ID: <20131024145855.GD9044@ulmo.nvidia.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:38:16PM -0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:22:06PM -0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > >> > >> > Experimental bindings could be a suitable temporary measure, but > >> perhaps > >> > other, better solutions exist. > >> > >> Yes, unstable bindings are part of the currently-documented plan. You > >> are > >> not expected to need it as a matter of course, but that facility will > >> exist. > > > > Can you point me to the documented plan? I must have missed it. > > It's not quite out there yet. > > It was thrashed out in the ARM summit yesterday, and Grant and I will be > polishing the draft tonight before presenting it to the Kernel Summit > tomorrow. Okay, that's great. Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help push this forward. Thierry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: