From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: Question regarding back compatibility for DT Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 22:56:46 +0100 Message-ID: <20170321215646.GC10342@mai> References: <20170321155814.GA10342@mai> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Rob Herring Cc: "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Alexander Kochetkov List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:27:37AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Daniel Lezcano > wrote: > > Hi Rob, dt people, > > > > is it acceptable a driver is changed using a new DT binding but becomes > > incompatible with the old DT files ? > > > > IOW, is it possible to change the DT and the driver without supporting the old > > DT format, forcing an update of the DT and the kernel ? > > If you want a global rule, then no it is not okay. However, it depends > on the platform and it's users. I just ask that breaking compatibility > and why is highlighted in the commit message and the platform > maintainer is okay with it. Thanks for the clarification. I will ask the maintainer if breaking the compatibility is ok. That shows how important is to wisely choose the right binding. -- Daniel -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- 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