On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:47:41PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Thu 2020-06-25 20:45:16, Mark Brown wrote: > > The documentation is an issue (and another thing that probably ought to > > block stable backports...) but the lack of usage is totally fine, there > > is zero requirement that DTs be upstream - this is a stable ABI. > I'd expect stable for fixing known bugs, not really for "someone out > of tree might be using old kernel with new dts". I don't think this is suitable for a stable backport, or that we should just stop calling this stable, I'm just pointing out that there is never any requirement for any DT stuff to have in-tree users.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
