Hi, On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 09:17:46PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 02/03/2014 08:45 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >Hi Daniel, > > > >(Adding DT mailing-list in CC) > > > >On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 05:36:03PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >>On 02/02/2014 02:37 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >>>The Allwinner A10 compatibles were following a slightly different compatible > >>>patterns than the rest of the SoCs for historical reasons. Add compatibles > >>>matching the other pattern to the timer driver for consistency, and keep the > >>>older one for backward compatibility. > >> > >>Hi Maxime, > >> > >>is it really needed to keep the old pattern ? > > > >We agreed during the ARM Kernel Summit to consider the DT as a stable > >ABI. > > > >While I'd be ok with removing the older ones, that also means that we > >would break the boot of newer kernels with older DT, so yes, we > >actually need to keep the old compatibles. > > Thanks for the clarification. > > So these old compatibles will stay there 'ad vitam aeternam', right ? Except for what Rob told, yep, that was my feeling, but Gregory and I seem to have a different interpretation of this rule :) Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
