On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 06:20:02PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Do we really want to polute the drivers and DT files with a ! in the > > compatible values? I thought we'd considered that, but chosen having the > > drivers that use unstable bindings depend on a Kconfig option as an > > alternative, not an additional step? > > I'd even go further and use "unstable-" as the prefix instead of "!" > which is way more explicit. I guess unstable- is as good as anything. I personally think that "!" is disturbing enough to the eye to make it abundantly clear that something is fishy. > > The one issue with doing this is that if a binding is thought to be > > unstable, but becomes stable later without any changes, we'll have to do > > busy-work to remove the ! in all the DT files, thus artificially > > introducing an incompatibility. Perhaps that's fine though? > > I'd say yes. Going from unstable to stable is quite a step for a binding > and that should be visible and worth a patch IMO. Also, when looking at > a DTS file or some driver code, it will avoid > confusion/misinterpretation if one can see immediately the status of a > binding. Yes, I fully agree. It might look like churn, but I think this could actually be a part of the formal process to stabilize a binding. It would be final step of that process, actually. Thierry
Attachment:
pgp0bYxEBNrEP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
