On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 04:14:24PM +0200, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> >  > I understand the point though, that it can be
> > > seen as an ABI (don't break the ABI), but it would be a shame for us to
> > > this as a pretext to not correct our mistake.
> > >
> > > Don't get me wrong, I don't like breaking ABIs more than the next guy
> > > (even though I fear Hans is starting to think this is becoming kind of
> > > habit for me), but this is really borderline.
> > 
> > Nothing borderline about it, take a standard Fedora or Debian image,
> > both of which rely on the dtb name embedded in the u-boot binary,
> > change the dtb name in the kernel, upgrade the kernel, try to boot,
> > and voila the board will not boot (and no the old dtb file will not
> > help, as each kernel build has its own dir with dtb files).
> > 
> > Really this is as hard an ABI as one can get, please do not break it.
> 
> Okay that makes sense, let's forget about the device-tree side then.

If you have some suggestions for future DT names, I'm definitely open
to it though.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to