On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 09:31:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > I'm afraid this kind of use case will never be properly supported, DT > stable ABI or not. > > Think about this: what kernel will actually be shipped in that board? > Most likely, it will be a BSP kernel from the vendor. Does the vendor > will have made that commitment to have a stable ABI for the DT? Will it > use the same bindings than mainline? Do we want to support all the crazy > bindings every vendor will come up with? > > I'm afraid the answer to these three questions will most of the time be > "no.".
Yes, I know, and it is sad but true. We can't stop the vendors from shipping half-baked BSPs. I really don't mind that they do that. After all, they want to get *something* working when they launch their chips. > That doesn't mean we shouldn't aim for *mainline* having a stable DT > ABI, but that kind of use case doesn't seem very realistic to me. Right, we can and should do better. I got the beaglebone Ethernet working in mainline (not by writing the driver, but by complaining over and over again). I except that it will continue to work and not fall victim to some random DT change. Thanks, Richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
