On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 1:06 AM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/23/18 03:33, Linus Walleij wrote: > > - Some indication that binding the connector like this will > > not implicate or screw things up for the DT-overlays > > idea, i.e. a both/and and not either/or approach. (...) > > For the moment, NACK since there is not a substantive change > from before. This is without having read beyond this > introduction. So I guess you disagree with the previous statement, and I need some elaboration to understand exactly what in this approach works counter to the goals of DT overlays. It's not like I'm overly infatuated with my own approach, but I want to get to a point where people can start to use these daughterboards no matter whether they use DT or ACPI. I'm missing ACPI input though, the DT people are more responsive :/ > I will read through the rest of the series and revisit my > previous conclusions, but most likely not for a few days. OK no problem there is no immediate hurry. Yours, Linus Walleij
