On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 14 March 2014 11:58, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 13 March 2014 18:47, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> NAK. These bindings have been documented as being there since March >>>> 14th 2012, and therefore need to be supported for ever by the driver. >>>> You can _augment_ the bindings with the generic ones, and change the >>>> DT files, but you can't remove the parsing of the old property names. >>> >>> I was kind of expecting this response. :-) >>> >>> So, since we made a mistake about adding these DT bindings we are now >>> unable to remove them, is there really no way back? >>> >>> In this particular case, I am confident that it should be safe to >>> remove them, but I guess this is more matter of principle, right? >> >> I can guarantee that there are no deployed U300, Nomadik or >> Ux500 systems out there with DTBs deployed in them, and >> for certain no products. At one point that was the criterion... >> All setups actually use the appended device tree. > > It sure seems like it's safe to remove them. > > If you decide to accept the patch, could we queue it through ARM SOC > with your help Linus? Maybe even for 3.15 as the sooner the better!? Actually I think I would want some indication from the device tree maintainers on this. After all they are safeguarding the DT process. I am however worried about the lack of response from that camp at times, this is supposed to be a simple yes/no question :-/ DT folks?? Yours, Linus Walleij -- 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
