From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Chris Friesen" Subject: Re: Board level compatibility matching Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:39:21 -0600 Message-ID: <489222F9.2020806@nortel.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linuxppc-dev-bounces+glppd-linuxppc64-dev=m.gmane.org@ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+glppd-linuxppc64-dev=m.gmane.org@ozlabs.org To: Grant Likely Cc: devicetree-discuss@ozlabs.org, linuxppc-dev List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Grant Likely wrote: > Doing so should simplify adding new board ports. In many cases it > would just involve dropping in a new .dts file. However, it retains > the flexability of overriding generic code with platform specific > fixups as the need arises. If it makes it easier for board vendors to do a clean port, you get a vote from me. I've seen a large amount of vendor code from that needed a lot of massaging before it would play nice with support for similar boards from other vendors--not to mention how ugly it looked with all the board-specific ifdefs. Chris