On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:04:26AM -0400, Matt Porter wrote: > DT has many benefits. It would be great to leverage them as long as it > doesn't interfere with the rate of change and willingness to evolve code > that's always been the strength of the kernel process. That strength is > too valuable to trade away for the "DT as ABI" vision. I agree with this, and have posted similar things before. The question I asked last time this came up, which was left unaswered: Who does this stable DT ABI vision benifit, and how much is that benifit worth? As an embedded ODM, I don't get very much value out of it, and I think others in my space would say the same. I continue to think the embedded vs not embedded are different and it makes no sense to pretend that my embedded system has the same requirements as something like a chromebook. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
