On 06/17/2014 08:56 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 08:37:09AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote: >> On 06/17/2014 05:09 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> A good way that this could have been done is to put an I2C EEPROM on >>> each cape, and have that store the DT fragment. The boot loader could >>> have then read that from each cape, and used that information to build >>> up the final DT. Why this hasn't been thought of, considering that the >>> kernel has been moving towards DT for years, is quite unbelievable. >> >> I had actually talked about this a long while back (face to face) with >> people, but the problem was (and still kind of is) the bindings >> changing, etc. > > And that's a strong argument for having stable bindings - or at the > very least, ensuring that new bindings which are compatible with older > versions. Yes. This was a few years back (a bit before the first beaglebone was public) so before we had really pushed up on some level of binding stability. -- Tom -- 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
