From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones)
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:43:45 +0100
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the i2c-embedded
 tree
In-Reply-To: <20120718103311.GG22739@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
References: <20120717130650.GB27595@sirena.org.uk> <500568D9.10805@linaro.org>
 <20120717133550.GC4477@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
 <50057058.2060002@linaro.org>
 <20120717142222.GE4477@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
 <50057C1A.80606@linaro.org>
 <20120717152001.GF4477@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
 <20120718053341.GA4009@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net>
 <20120718095937.GB22739@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
 <50069006.8050301@linaro.org>
 <20120718103311.GG22739@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Message-ID: <50069361.1080509@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 18/07/12 11:33, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:29:26AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On 18/07/12 10:59, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>>> It's not the using device tree bit that creates concern for me here,
>>> it's the fact that the board and silicon aren't being separated.
>
>> What's the difference?
>
>>> +- db8500.dtsi       // silicon
>>> \	
>>> +-- snowball.dts    // board
>
> I have glanced at some of this stuff in the past, thanks.  Now think how
> that's working for people when they put the configuration for the
> silicon in the same DT node as the configuration for the board...

Granted, ideally the configuration and silicon description should be 
separated. I don't know that is the case for us yet however. That is 
something I'll enforce when we have a new dts file, which will be coming 
very soon.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
M: +44 77 88 633 515
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog