From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] regulator: dt: regulator match by regulator-compatible Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 23:36:33 +0100 Message-ID: <20120621223632.GA4037@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1340194987-23654-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <201206211450.35713.arnd@arndb.de> <20120621161459.GY4037@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <201206211717.46142.arnd@arndb.de> <20120621194544.GZ4037@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4FE397E5.1070707@firmworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="hk/xWDG3xnLTY+FR" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4FE397E5.1070707@firmworks.com> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mitch Bradley Cc: Arnd Bergmann , devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rob.herring@calxeda.com, Laxman Dewangan , lee.jones@linaro.org, lrg@ti.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --hk/xWDG3xnLTY+FR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:53:41AM -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote: Whatever mail program you're using appears to be generating HTML mails and isn't doing an awesome job at formatting them, the plain text version is mangled too with most peculiar word wrapping which is quite hard to read. I've reflowed. > On 6/21/2012 9:45 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 05:17:45PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >>On Thursday 21 June 2012, Mark Brown wrote: > >>>I'm not that big a fan of moving all the data into device tree as it > >>>means that you need even more parsing code and you need to update the > >>>device trees for every board out there every time you want to add > >>>support for a new feature which doesn't seem like a win. > Maybe I'm missing something, but in general it's not necessary to > update old device trees to support new features. The trick is to > define a new property that describes the new possibility. Absence of > that property implies that the default - the thing that used to happen > across the board, before the feature existed - applies. Which is not a success in terms of deploying the new support, or indeed in terms of deploying bugfixes. It increases the overall complexity of the system and I'm having a hard time getting at all excited about any benefits. --hk/xWDG3xnLTY+FR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJP46HoAAoJEBus8iNuMP3dQDMP/j1W4ktbFyGq0xgJWlp/7mT6 HE9gK/E6DiGNNK9sNvfxuN/JF4sDrPFtCjTc/7Uib+PT61RVPoFej17sxA5FZSG6 jxuhfluMBZ1s3zDjFH9qKUhnqea77Uhkz+shF33aYHILDGBv/wrftcvsluQ6Bzdt H3rsmb9wajLywfy9+6ZgVXHCj1xmTQfAS85Fhc09QcVlDK/xYIPHQ9GQgYb7EV5K OQQhULAEkLk6OQB0SLOsBAz9xrRFqbdF9oHJCIuAeXQcvWXEVwdT0SuZHUg2G3Of UXUPj7mOAY28emrZXAJ3lh34t2ZStA3tGMEVJcXSMSTVJ/8AbzmsdeoIoyFujEr0 z5mZPXNEsicAmKN44FbQDyxbnq1++OlL3GCD7+pgcDFbGQYbQncNxgz9zLvzGRTR sOvfukDYsG+0SSCme88b8zRng24pqOT0U7avsoVl2y6lJv9+LVTkuyX5QYO8Qd7w pI3CqoKvci+lECgkh/1yZ2DSGfE6hRqKb5+LOuoci0tuPPRAK+bHVzwOgqIh5UvF NnV9dRxvfI7++Aa5N2FikavUTGxPEIm7N9X1IWeor37PzkVWNMujaqu2NhNogy6q IPQ76vqycuZ+cjoj5NEj3ySOEeg/t2f+4KP3fXuqVu5fgQ9T+lMKDrm6nQk3A6rf OAhPs6vMXF8cKMB8Anwg =Fwmn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --hk/xWDG3xnLTY+FR--