On 13/08/13 10:54, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx> [130809 01:46]: >> >> So as is evident, I have things in my mind that should be improved. Maybe >> the most important question for short term future is: >> >> Can we add DSS DT bindings for OMAP4 as unstable bindings? It would give us >> some proper testing of the related code, and would also allow us to remove >> the related hacks (which don't even work quite right). However, I have no >> idea yet when the unstable DSS bindings would turn stable. >> >> If we shouldn't add the bindings as unstable, when should the bindings be >> added? Wait until CDF is in the mainline, and use that? > > I don't think we should add any temporary bindings as it's going to be > a pain to support those in the long run. I suggest you initially just > stick to established bindings for the basic hardware IO address and > interrupts etc, then those should still be valid with the generic panel > bindings later on. I don't understand what does it matter if the bindings are temporary, or basic established bindings. In both cases the DT data needs to be changed when the CDF is taken into use. Well, one difference is that the temporary bindings would give us working display, but having only basic bindings would not. So I don't see any reason to add only the basic bindings. Or how would it work? Tomi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
