On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Grant et. al., > > It recently dawned on me that all the Tegra DeviceTree support is using a > marketing name for the SoC ("tegra250"). NVIDIA would prefer that we use > engineering names for the SoC (e.g. "tegra20" now, "tegra30" for an > upcoming SoC). The primary motivation for this is that engineering names > tend to be more stable and map more directly to the HW design. > > Is it still possible to make this change, if I submit the appropriate > patches to do this? Yes, please do. I'm completely in support of that. > So, far, I see devicetree/next only refers to the Tegra serial port, > whereas devicetree/arm and devicetree/test refer to more Tegra devices in > this way. I'm not quite sure how the flow of patches works between these 3 > trees. For the serial port, I obviously need to submit a patch against > devicetree/next, but I'm not so sure about which of devicetree/arm or > devicetree/test to target for the other devices. devicetree/next is the stuff I'm actually merging. devicetree/test is stuff being experimented with, and devicetree/arm is stuff I expect to get merged, but I'm not actually merging through my tree (or just isn't quite ready yet). You can use devicetree/test as a staging ground for getting things ready for upstream. Let me know if anything you see in devicetree/test needs to get upstreamed ASAP because your work depends on it, and we'll figure out how/when to get it done. g. > > Sorry for bringing this up so late in the game. > > Thanks! > > -- > nvpublic > > -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html