On 02/03/18 16:32, Vincent Legoll wrote:
> Hi,
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 5:24 PM, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> wrote:
>> Regarding the whole forward/backward compatibility:
>> I clearly see the difficulty in coming up with a "perfect" DT from day
>> one, especially for badly documented SoCs, where mainlining is driven by
>> hobbyists. So I was wondering if we introduce a grace period, where we
>> declare the DT "unstable" or "subject to incompatible changes" for some
>> releases (not too many). In hindsight we might declare 4.12 the stable
>> DT base for the A64, for instance.
>> This would allow us to start upstreaming early, with a small feature set
>> only (just serial + clocks + pinctrl, as for the H6). Additional
>> features (PMIC) might then add small incompatibilities (like this one
>> here), until we are reasonably confident about the DT.
>> Does that sound useful?
> Kind of "staging" for DT ?

Yeah, somewhat, though I would like to see this moved out of the Linux
context ;-) Actually this would also simplify collaboration with other
stakeholders (U-Boot, *BSD, Your-toy-OS), as they can participate in the
discussion without being bound to some particular release cycle or
special upstreaming process.
And ideally the DT would not be in the Linux tree in the first place, to
not give people the idea of it being a "Linux config file".

U-Boot mailing list

Reply via email to