On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 8:57 AM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 12:36:04PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > > On 2020-02-06 11:46 am, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > This makes sense but it is an ABI break so is going to need > > > quirking for existing boards that unfortunately rely on the > > > existing behaviour. > > > I guess the existing (mis)behaviour could be predicated on an > > of_machine_is_compatible() check for Rock64 boards - it's ugly, but should > > do the job if you feel it's more important to be 100% strict about not > > regressing supported systems for any possible kernel/DTB combination. > > Yes, that's what I'm suggesting - we don't need to be exhaustive > but having an obvious place for people to put the quirk in if > they are affected is much better practice than just silently > letting things break. Might want to put a warning in there too, so that if someone is paying attention they will see that they are using an out of date device tree.
