On 27 November 2014 at 15:24, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: > No that won't suffice. You can't modify the DTs of the platforms using > cpufreq-dt.c as of today. They should continue to work, so either you > retain all the existing platform device creation in platform code as is > or do something like below with the blacklist for those platforms. Is the meaning of "backward compatibility" for DTs mentioned somewhere? I am not sure if we have to *always* follow the compatibility you are talking about. Probably we want new DTs to continue supporting older version of kernels. Not that older DTs should work with new kernel changes. So, even with another field in cpuX node, we wouldn't break older kernels as they will anyway get the device from platform code. @Rob? > OK, in this way you still continue to work on existing platforms with > *old DT*. Probably not. -- 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
