On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 12:55:13PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 07:04:20PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > > > Mostly consistency. Most of the experience we have with the flattened > > > device tree up to this point hasn't bothered with the 'status' > > > property. It is only when AMP and hypervisors cam online that it > > > became important to use a status property, and that only when the > > > kernel needs to be told that the device does indeed exist, but it must > > > not be touched. I'd like to continue that pattern for new DT users > > > with the default assumption that a device is enabled unless the board > > > .dts explicitly disables it. > [...] > > Besides the bothering that we have to list so many unused controllers > > in individual board dts file, it's also hard to tell which controllers > > are actually available on the board. People have to look at imx53.dts > > to get a full list and then exclude the ones in imx53-<board>.dts as > > "disabled". > > > > And if we go the way opposite, adding "disabled" status for everyone > > in imx53.dts, we will only need to specify the peripherals that are > > actually available on board with "okay" status in imx53-<board>.dts. > > And it's much more clear for people to see what peripherals are > > available on individual board. > > > > So I'm going the way than you suggested. Please let me know if you > > strongly dislikes it. > > Yes, I strongly dislike it. I understand the concern, but at this > early stage with converting to device tree I think consistency between > platforms is more important. We can talk about the issue at Linaro > Connect in 2 weeks, but in the mean time please use the > enabled-by-default/explicitly-disabled pattern. > Okay, hope you will not ask me to use the opposite pattern when you actually see the patch :) -- Regards, Shawn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
