From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao02.cox.net (fed1rmmtao02.cox.net [68.230.241.37]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B72AF67C6C for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2006 04:21:44 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 11:21:43 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Matthew McClintock Subject: Re: RFC: Location for Device Tree Sources? Message-ID: <20060802182143.GP3075@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <1154464346.19994.4.camel@cashmere.sps.mot.com> <1154466094.11069.6.camel@localhost> <20060802003504.GA20439@mag.az.mvista.com> <1154481150.2676.3.camel@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> <528646bc0608012020l11690cf7wbb7d93e6ba6eae90@mail.gmail.com> <33AC4A3A-876A-4AF9-B851-928EE80A9D80@kernel.crashing.org> <20060802163822.GK3075@smtp.west.cox.net> <1154542161.5550.25.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1154542161.5550.25.camel@localhost> Cc: "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" , Guennadi Liakhovetski List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 01:09:21PM -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote: > On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 09:38 -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > > I'll throw in the caveat that I'm not 100% sure we're that stable yet, > > but it certainly seems like it, at least for the overall portion where > > you might really have incompatible trees. More or less complete (now > > every device is described!) dts should be interchangable to the kernel > > for the custom board X is just a little different from ref board Y > > issues (and now, in theory, the Just Like A Sandpoint board, with a > > correct dts will boot the 'sandpoint' kernel). > > The sandpoint (as far as I know) does not have a stable DTS. So in this > case including the DTS in the kernel would reduce confusion. The same > could be said for other boards where the DTS needed to be changed for > the IRQ rework. The old DTS will no longer boot the new kernels. I'm not > sure how much longer we will run into this problem though. Yes, as I said, I'm not totally sure we're at the stable point right now, but I think that we are. I'll add that maybe we need to think about API changes and DTS format versions. To quote from my post.. > > X bugs) or a change that requires a dts version bump. Now it sounds like the IRQ thing was an "Oops, we should have changed the dts version" and bailed, noting what is wrong with the dts. -- Tom Rini