From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [RFC] of: Allow for experimental device tree bindings Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 20:59:10 +0200 Message-ID: <20131023185909.GC7863@ulmo.nvidia.com> References: <1382540779-6334-1-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com> <5267FA58.9050002@wwwdotorg.org> <20131023172001.GA3379@katana> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9zSXsLTf0vkW971A" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131023172001.GA3379@katana> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Stephen Warren , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, ksummit-2013-discuss-cunTk1MwBs98uUxBSJOaYoYkZiVZrdSR2LY78lusg7I@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --9zSXsLTf0vkW971A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 06:20:02PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: >=20 > > Do we really want to polute the drivers and DT files with a ! in the > > compatible values? I thought we'd considered that, but chosen having the > > drivers that use unstable bindings depend on a Kconfig option as an > > alternative, not an additional step? >=20 > I'd even go further and use "unstable-" as the prefix instead of "!" > which is way more explicit. I guess unstable- is as good as anything. I personally think that "!" is disturbing enough to the eye to make it abundantly clear that something is fishy. > > The one issue with doing this is that if a binding is thought to be > > unstable, but becomes stable later without any changes, we'll have to do > > busy-work to remove the ! in all the DT files, thus artificially > > introducing an incompatibility. Perhaps that's fine though? >=20 > I'd say yes. Going from unstable to stable is quite a step for a binding > and that should be visible and worth a patch IMO. Also, when looking at > a DTS file or some driver code, it will avoid > confusion/misinterpretation if one can see immediately the status of a > binding. Yes, I fully agree. It might look like churn, but I think this could actually be a part of the formal process to stabilize a binding. It would be final step of that process, actually. Thierry --9zSXsLTf0vkW971A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSaBx9AAoJEN0jrNd/PrOhEIUP/0nNAlgicFic5yEHsKXpdt4a XVyACFK7h/XI+X6BnrOGUEF6qlIB8VanOtcxWVYdhws2LcPZ59gM9o+AoCC98UQP hoASd3BPQSv4MlkjO0cD22DkYUICSGhKFEv5WpFEP7vdeYh/Yk7dWbQpVNdTv/j3 gkn32X2c7FVbzU3wiStS3YECm96x7+0Ue37GzOs83AnDdMC6e4+H3NeOyuDhR1Bn 8XnO95Hsv2tPMjGqa5lA7b8NaGJ5ZuglXU0IQHw6DGJQbUTp6EBQyxNcmfGIDQWM 1/tM/mT67Le/qwJRXFL5lO8Y8a1PZ4+C2IAERCdYM4qLn+tVe5E/CfqAjE9qR/Oi frEoBw2ZnTvM31K5TQk5EV047yb8pJPFVBbPGhrxhOB6waK+bnKcEoaXWLKpLieL s71Ql6hJjxLTOEPs0eEEg5UivIzBYu+yVjh1qYm3MCUgKZH1lAejOVY4rokoOkCH kWcCU7Jopbe8rxS5yq7nBguGNFitTSuI8pW2D+ajgjgMt5JTr1NAa/RmqBF/WHF3 3Z2TSl9N8nAYF7KqCIRfYVVkfsk0bWD+0t73KZIcOa8DoNgBowFPwoYiPIU3ATE/ x8QiV3hDHsKKaKyavYJkZ1LxKiU0JUoRuEhuAfJ34Y1SraPje/dukmZ1FkJqVYqf KZBoLXC0I/UjuAZHerHk =Nzad -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9zSXsLTf0vkW971A-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html