Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757058Ab3GYUQS (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:16:18 -0400 Received: from mail-qa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.216.41]:50355 "EHLO mail-qa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755974Ab3GYUQP (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:16:15 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20130725193135.GT23879@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <20130725193135.GT23879@titan.lakedaemon.net> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:16:14 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: DT bindings as ABI [was: Do we have people interested in device tree janitoring / cleanup?] From: Rob Herring To: Jason Cooper Cc: Olof Johansson , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Russell King - ARM Linux , Samuel Ortiz , Catalin Marinas , Domenico Andreoli , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Dave P Martin , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1464 Lines: 32 On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 02:11:31PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Olof Johansson wrote: > >> > One problem that needs to be solved is obviously how a binding >> > graduates from tentative to locked. This work isn't going to be very >> > interesting to most people, I suspect. Think standards committee type >> > work. >> >> I think a time based stabilization period would be better than a >> separate directory to apply bindings too. Or time plus periodic review >> perhaps. > > The only problem with a time-based versus separate directory is how do > users who've downloaded the tree determine which bindings are stable? > If they pull a tarball, or receive an SDK, there is most likely no git > history attached. Well, if time based includes moving the binding out of the kernel, then that is what defines it as stable or not. I guess that is a form of a separate directory. I don't think we want to be moving bindings twice: tentative -> stable and kernel -> DT repo. The policy could be as simple as an binding without change in at least N kernel releases is moved out and stable. Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/