On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 06:28:07AM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Devicetree bindings are supposed to be operating system independent
and should thus not describe how a specific functionality is implemented
in Linux.
Cc: Rob Herring robh...@kernel.org
Cc: Pawel Moll pawel.m...@arm.com
Cc:
On 10/07/14 00:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Devicetree bindings are supposed to be operating system independent
and should thus not describe how a specific functionality is implemented
in Linux.
So your argument is that linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings should
not be specific to Linux.
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 11:21:11AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
On 10/07/14 00:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Devicetree bindings are supposed to be operating system independent
and should thus not describe how a specific functionality is implemented
in Linux.
So your argument is that
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:21:11PM +0100, Rob Landley wrote:
On 10/07/14 00:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Devicetree bindings are supposed to be operating system independent
and should thus not describe how a specific functionality is implemented
in Linux.
So your argument is that
On 10/07/2014 09:31 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 11:21:11AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
On 10/07/14 00:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Devicetree bindings are supposed to be operating system independent
and should thus not describe how a specific functionality is implemented
in
On 10/07/14 11:59, David Daney wrote:
On 10/07/2014 09:31 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 11:21:11AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
On 10/07/14 00:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Devicetree bindings are supposed to be operating system independent
and should thus not describe how a
