From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Ripard Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: Re-add "syscon" compatible Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:16:25 +0200 Message-ID: <20180921151625.wkaypyueyi2pguur@flea> References: <20180917152857.162662-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20180921153522.0413c280@donnerap.Emea.Arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6176884405080605230==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180921153522.0413c280@donnerap.Emea.Arm.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Andre Przywara Cc: Mark Rutland , Rob Herring , devicetree , Chen-Yu Tsai , Icenowy Zheng , linux-arm-kernel , Corentin Labbe List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --===============6176884405080605230== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="662wibcsa7gtpfvu" Content-Disposition: inline --662wibcsa7gtpfvu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 03:35:22PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > The problem is: we broke compatibility with older kernels. The problem is that we never said we wouldn't. We've had this discussion a number of times. You forced the backward compatibility onto us without any warning, and now we have to support it. And it's already a pain. Maybe ARM can fix that problem by just assigning more engineers to that, but that's not something we can do. The fundamental difference is that we're mostly just a bunch of spare time programmers working on this platform, with a partial documentation for the controllers, at best. You forced me to ask these developpers to work on their weekends and evenings on some crazy corner cases to maintain the backward compatibility. And honestly, both from a technical and human standpoint, I definitely understand if some of them are just leaving and don't want to work on it anymore. I would probably do the same in their position. And having to ask that for companies like ARM or SUSE just makes it more frustrating to be honest. So there's simply no way you have forward compatibility while I'm there. Or you manage to convince all the ARM maintainers and enforce that compatibility for all the platforms. Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com --662wibcsa7gtpfvu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEE0VqZU19dR2zEVaqr0rTAlCFNr3QFAlulC0gACgkQ0rTAlCFN r3S89A/+KQXiLhk0SV5jWwSf2tzDZcCCEyA0rHvmFvyrRRPzh/kKdNAZUG16ccPi nTxAkwStKQ5uGHaxD5y4xrJRkx0EvGc2CrHWXljh/9WZkb5p9A+Pgr1zd4bPLrjr XbPkiNoY24o8sJf/CaVTBZOR+MUKcdYRGyjQ6S6ZJ+SUWf7ztv4KJm7f5K6zELS2 PWESzn7izDG+FnpU9CX7G05xacwM7TYrvldGfnL6EHx2bFbNLu3ft25pisQRwCf1 ovC9MC71LAJDtdohCv+7lmyCo8CpHGslqXYgXjGwijBR18rJ1Up8wK3zfz3nvlwA pCgX7hgE4MrT+Et9WvtiL70z39T+camUvPdpgS1/sYjkfYEzzwoX1BCcvlcqoicv nG5CVwNoWjkGRgACpBh/Ge1hW6LbcUrvWPxNLzrUu5obcjndLTceC8pkkU/jdjjV uQ9qIO7eVnBXLO2g/DRqdqnnKzDzKsjZsFU9QIDf6kMijAy+LiWdY0YxWgLqOMY9 1CzTrtJkoOTwGtf31kDCZ2PjNiT0g/ttvtuL9OqJ0+2HgGGIMvbLh+lMTNnKcbzw LzwhJgnbcfZNhEcq4YFzh9oDyFJL6mPEh+eFeXstLfcKFaBuTJSkVsiMYvDAHoLp 71XFP1sZrCPATEC29dNqAbO+bDUuPelrBaPdHdF+po3AbB22V+8= =DToA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --662wibcsa7gtpfvu-- --===============6176884405080605230== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel --===============6176884405080605230==--