From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 18:07:27 +0100
Subject: ARM, SoC: About the use DT-defined properties by 3rd-party drivers
In-Reply-To: <57D6DC83.8020000@tabi.org>
References: <57BDAF2E.10502@laposte.net>
 <CAOZdJXVjsR3NTWiJX33yT3jYk=FU65raWoMooTLD7OMN3sqP-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <57D69FB1.2020801@laposte.net> <20160912123809.GB13741@leverpostej>
 <57D6AA54.6000208@laposte.net> <20160912135549.GA14165@leverpostej>
 <CANCZdfri+T59FA4XTaH5JbW0BaJHt3w5eaSkpD8NrJn6nZrZbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <57D6D7D2.7030507@laposte.net>
 <CANCZdfqZEMRaFqgph6kZPdyxBcURBiEV0XoH0vPG28Hhm5+77A@mail.gmail.com>
 <57D6DC83.8020000@tabi.org>
Message-ID: <20160912170727.GH14165@leverpostej>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:49:07AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Warner Losh wrote:
> >Do I have more examples
> >where FreeBSD has to deviate because the DT is actually Linux
> >specific and does a poor job of modeling the hardware and instead
> >reflects the Linux driver model? I have plenty of those...
> 
> I think it would be a great idea if the FreeBSD and Linux DT
> maintainers collaborated on cleaning up the DT bindings so that this
> problem no longer occurs (or at least, not normally).

Indeed. Theoretically/hopefully, the devicetree.org stuff creates a more
inclusive forum for this.

Thanks,
Mark.