From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao07.cox.net (fed1rmmtao07.cox.net [68.230.241.32]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 485BA67C40 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2006 04:57:30 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 11:57:28 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Jon Loeliger Subject: Re: RFC: Location for Device Tree Sources? Message-ID: <20060802185728.GQ3075@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <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> <20060802182143.GP3075@smtp.west.cox.net> <1154542988.19994.36.camel@cashmere.sps.mot.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1154542988.19994.36.camel@cashmere.sps.mot.com> Cc: Guennadi Liakhovetski , "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 01:23:08PM -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote: > On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 13:21, Tom Rini wrote: > > > 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. > > This confuses me. There hasn't been a change in the DTS > format at all. I've even updated the 8641HPCN DTS file > across the IRQ updates and all is fine. Same (DTS) format > both before and after the IRQ changes. > > What have I missed here? Matthew said: > 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. Now, if we've had to change the contents of the DTS because of a kernel change, I'd say the DTS format changed as when I say format I mean not only layout and naming, but what the contents are supposed to contain. And, so it's clear, I don't know if we're at the very stable format (names/layout/content means...), but when we are at that point, what Matthew noted should, IMHO, be a graceful (ie explained in the panic() or something) death. And, so it's clear, I think (and hope!) we all agree on that last part, once we hit stability. -- Tom Rini