On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 06:21:35AM +0000, Gupta, Pekon wrote: [..] > > > >Pekon, do you think this binding proposal is good enough to describe OMAP > >NAND > >ECC mode? > > > >I'm not implying we should deprecate the recently added "ti-nand-ecc-opt", > >but just want to know it's eventually possible. > > > Yes, this is good approach for long-term, and it can replace "ti-nand-ecc-opt" > "ti-nand-ecc-opt" is not new DT binding, it just got some new values added > However, you have to convince DT Maintainers to get this in, and then > deprecate > other vendor specific bindings. It would be difficult to maintain backward > compatibility to these bindings, if we move to 'nand-ecc-strength'. >
Putting the DT maintainers on the To: field to get some feedback. > At some-point we need to get some concrete guidelines from DT Maintainers on > how long we should support deprecated bindings in our code, And what is the > age of DT binding. I think David Woodhouse should throw more light, as he had > some discussions & ideas on about DT binding life, during a linux conference. > That's a good question :-) -- Ezequiel García, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
