On 17/02/2017 at 13:45:44 +0100, Tobias Jakobi wrote: > > The device tree is a representation of the hardware itself. The state > > of the driver support doesn't change the hardware you're running on, > > just like your BIOS/UEFI on x86 won't change the device it reports to > > Linux based on whether it has a driver for it. > Like Emil already said, the new bindings and the DT entries are solely > introduced to support a proprietary out-of-tree module. > Because device tree describes the hardware, the added binding doesn't support any particular module. The eventually upstreamed drvier will share the same bindings. > The current workflow when introducing new DT entries is the following: > - upstream a driver that uses the entries > - THEN add the new entries > Exactly not, if you do that, checkpatch will complain loudly. Because you must not add a driver using bindings that are not documented first. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com -- 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
