From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren) Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 11:06:52 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] bcm53xx: initial support for the BCM5301/BCM470X SoC with ARM CPU In-Reply-To: <20130729132029.GI5022@ohporter.com> References: <2043662.BcW19XTTMG@lenovo> <20130719020611.GA4941@glitch> <20130723185733.GB6811@ohporter.com> <20130724231106.GB29801@glitch> <20130726000412.GH5022@linaro.org> <51F2F554.8030709@broadcom.com> <51F2F885.2040002@wwwdotorg.org> <20130729093000.GI3528@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20130729132029.GI5022@ohporter.com> Message-ID: <51F6A12C.30101@wwwdotorg.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/29/2013 07:20 AM, Matt Porter wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:30:00AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: ... >> I'd be happy to have "broadcom" for all *new* bindings, as it's already >> in some bindings alongside "bcm" and "brcm", and is certainly the >> clearest of the available options. >> >> However, given the strong feelings of many against breaking existing >> dts, we need to support the existing instances of "bcm" and "brcm" in > > Whoa, how would existing dts break? At this instant in time, all the > bindings and dts are still in the kernel tree. A series to address this > make all bindings, drivers, and dts consistent in one shot. While there are some *.dts files in the kernel source tree, that is no guarantee that: a) People don't have custom *.dts files that are not in the kernel source tree, and hence can't be updated by Linux kernel patches. b) People actually replace their *.dtb when updating their zImage. Since DT is explicitly supposed to be an ABI, everything is explicitly supposed to work if they do only update their zImage and not their *.dtb.