From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 22:51:22 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] thermal: armada: Remove support for A375-Z1 SoC
In-Reply-To: <20141121201858.GB22670@titan.lakedaemon.net>
References: <1415116839-4323-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
 <1415116839-4323-2-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
 <20141120193804.GA7252@developer>
 <20141121201858.GB22670@titan.lakedaemon.net>
Message-ID: <20141121225122.1165b466@free-electrons.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Dear Jason Cooper,

On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:18:58 -0500, Jason Cooper wrote:

> > First of, I would like to mention that best thing to avoid such
> > situation is to be careful when documenting dt entries that represent hw
> > that no one has access to (except internal people).
> 
> Agreed, mainline support for an SoC so early in it's lifetime was new
> for all of us.  Lesson learned.

So the suggestion would be to not document the DT bindings at all,
until we reach a "stable" hardware that is distributed externally?

Note that the Z1 stepping is not completely internal: a small
selection of early customers have access to it. But it normally never
ends up in final products, it's aimed at allowing those early customers
to start their development soon.

I don't mind adjusting how DT bindings are documented for such early
SoCs stepping. But I really believe it's important to have a way to
handle this situation nicely: we've been asking for years SoC vendors
to start upstreaming their code early. Now that they start to do it, we
shouldn't complain and instead adapt to this situation :-)

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com