From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [RFC] Allow device tree to be modified by additonal device tree sections Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:57:37 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20100223192659.11939.42521.stgit@angua> <20100224013658.GG7187@yookeroo> <20100224044220.GI7187@yookeroo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100224044220.GI7187@yookeroo> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: David Gibson Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:42 PM, David Gibson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 07:05:53PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:36 PM, David Gibson >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:28:13PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: > [snip] >> My opinion: no way. =A0We're not working with real OF, and none of the >> use cases I see have any need of such a feature. =A0While we could >> forbid it now and permit it later, we cannot permit it now and forbid >> it later. =A0I say no until someone comes up with a reasonable use case >> on why it should be implemented. > > A sound argument. =A0Done. Okay, thanks for the feedback. I've rebased the patch onto your multi-label patch and added support for merging labels. I'll properly test it and repost tomorrow. Cheers, g.