From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: add "simple-bus" to "arm, amba-bus" compatible nodes Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 10:12:55 +0000 Message-ID: <1456999975.2856.18.camel@linaro.org> References: <1456804620-8750-1-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> <20160301114610.GB30602@leverpostej> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Masahiro Yamada Cc: Mark Rutland , Rob Herring , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Heiko Stuebner , Pawel Moll , Ian Campbell , linux-arm-msm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Wei Xu , David Brown , arm@kernel.org, Kukjin Kim , Kumar Gala , Andy Gross , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , Dinh Nguyen , linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2016-03-03 at 12:07 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: [...] > This patch is derived from Rob Herring' comment > "BTW, we should also kill off "amba-bus" which is an ambiguous term" > in the following thread: > http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1601.0/01822.html > > > So, the plan would be like this: > > [1] Make device trees not depend on "arm,amba-bus" (this commit) > [2] New device trees should no longer use "arm,amba-bus" alone. > [3] Go though some releases until we do not care about the backward > compatibility Why would we stop caring about backwards compatibility? If I was a user of any of the platforms in question and updated my kernel, I wouldn't expect to have to debug why it was broken, then install a new dtb to fix it - which may be a tricky thing to do, depending on the firmware used to boot Linux. > [4] Drop "arm,amba-bus" from of_default_bus_match_table -- Tixy