On Feb 20, 2014, at 4:39 AM, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:43:58 -0700, Warner Losh <wlosh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Feb 19, 2014, at 2:09 PM, Grant Likely wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Jason Cooper <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 04:57:50PM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: >>>>> It will be interesting to see which rules should apply for merging new >>>>> bindings. I know that devicetrees should be OS agnostic, but sometimes >>>>> they are modelled after how Linux currently works. What happens when the >>>>> *BSD guys have different ideas how a good binding looks like? How will >>>>> such conflicts be resolved? >>>> >>>> That's more a question for Grant. I assume we'll all put on our big-boy >>>> pants and pick the best technical solution based on their merits. :) >>> >>> I think you've answered it pretty competently. >> >> What, the BSDs don't get a free pass to dump junk into the process. I'm shocked :) >> >> But we have bug-boy pants over in BSD land, so that shouldn't be a problem. > > Bug-boy pants? Sounds sticky. Yea, gotta those accidental typos... Warner -- 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
