Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751237Ab1ENEOq (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 May 2011 00:14:46 -0400 Received: from mail-iw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:45395 "EHLO mail-iw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750770Ab1ENEOp convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 May 2011 00:14:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20110511211438.GM5315@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> From: Grant Likely Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 06:14:24 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: _wYJ2Pzy8Yv4nIkiHd-es7YY8ck Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] Basic ARM devicetree support To: Nicolas Pitre Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , Stephen Rothwell , Thomas Gleixner , linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2130 Lines: 49 On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Wed, 11 May 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > >> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:44:49PM +0200, Grant Likely wrote: >> > Right now it merges cleanly with linux-next and the resulting tree >> > builds and boots at least on qemu. ?Unless you really object, I'm >> > going to ask Stephen to add the following branch to the /end/ of the >> > list of trees for linux-next so it can easily be dropped it if it >> > causes any problems. >> >> As far as the set of five patches looks fine to me, I don't have any >> objections against them. ?So I think we can merge them for .40. Yay! Thanks Russell! >> What I've always worried about is the platform stuff, and that's >> something I'm going to continue worrying about because I don't think >> we have sufficient review capacity to ensure that we don't end up >> with lots of stupidities. Understood, and I agree to a point, but I'm cautiously optimistic that the review process we talked about heavily this week will be able to push back on bad bindings to prevent a lot of these problems. It also helps that we we can cut over to device tree in board ports in stages without needing a change-everything-flag-day. Devices can be converted one by one, which will limit the volume of stuff that needs to be reviewed at one time. > DT is certainly not a silver bullet. ?Good judgement will be needed as > to what is put in DT and how it is represented. ?I don't think that it > would make things worse than they are now though. +1 > I also do have some concerns about some aspects of DT which I've > expressed several times in the past. ?However I don't think holding back > those patches any longer is a solution though. > > So consider this as a ACK from my part to merge those patches now. ?This > will get the ball rolling. Thanks Nicolas. g. -- 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/