Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759077Ab3HNBts (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Aug 2013 21:49:48 -0400 Received: from mail.active-venture.com ([67.228.131.205]:51238 "EHLO mail.active-venture.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758814Ab3HNBtq (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Aug 2013 21:49:46 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 108.223.40.66 Message-ID: <520AE238.4030304@roeck-us.net> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 18:49:44 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130803 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" CC: David Gibson , Mark Rutland , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Russell King - ARM Linux , Ian Campbell , Pawel Moll , Richard Cochran , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "rob.herring@calxeda.com" , Tomasz Figa , Jason Gunthorpe , "jonsmirl@gmail.com" , Domenico Andreoli , mbizon@freebox.fr, Dave P Martin , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] DT bindings as ABI [was: Do we have people interested in device tree janitoring / cleanup?] References: <20130725175702.GC22291@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <1999586.84BnWE5EUh@thinkpad> <20130731191209.GA8027@netboy> <1409617.9untvfnOTJ@flatron> <20130731200017.GC8027@netboy> <20130731201457.GA24642@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20130731204817.GC24642@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20130802035027.GA19115@voom.redhat.com> <520AC1FE.1030600@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <520AC1FE.1030600@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1415 Lines: 36 On 08/13/2013 04:32 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 08/01/2013 08:50 PM, David Gibson wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 05:26:47PM -0400, jonsmirl@gmail.com >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux >>> wrote: >>>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 04:37:36PM -0400, jonsmirl@gmail.com >>> wrote: >> [snip] >>> Alternatively you may be of the belief that it is impossible to >>> get rid of the board specific code. But x86 doesn't have any of >>> it, why should ARM? >> >> Sure x86 has board specific code. It's just that x86 basically >> only has one board - PC. >> > > That is one aspect (hardware standardization)... but it is more to it > than that. > I have to deal with lots of embedded / non-PC x86 based systems. Worst one I encountered so far was a board where the VGA memory space was re-used for an eeprom. The upcoming next generation hardware I'll have to support is so far off-standard that I'll probably have to define a new platform type (similar to OLPC or CE4100). No, it is not all PC. Not anymore. Intel has started to sell into the embedded space, where PC compatibility is not a requirement. Guenter -- 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/