On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:59:59PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:

On Wednesday 31 of July 2013 12:37:37 Maxime Bizon wrote:

quoted

Board files are C code anyone has the skill to edit/understand/refactor.
Moving to DT and keep them in tree tightly coupled with the kernel
version just adds another layer of indirection for *no purpose*.

+1

That is exactly what I tried to say.

quoted

Linus started the whole thing some years ago by refusing to pull ARM
tree [1]. Reread his post, what he wants is clearly b).

Going a) does not solve any problem. You are just moving churn to
somewhere else. We had board files churn, then defconfigs churn, DTS
files (and associated drivers) will be next.

And at this rate, we are headed for another Linus ultimatum, sooner or
later.

quoted

DT is self inflicted pain. It has to be for the greater good.

It has several benefits over board files that I mentioned above, possible 
without fully separating them from kernel tree.

Every time a criticism is voiced about DT, the DT people stick their
fingers in their ears and say, "NAH, NAH, NAH, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

WRT to DT-as-platform-device, we would rather stick with the C code,
please. Just pushing the configuration tables into an external form
does not simplify the problem. In fact, it creates new problems by
inviting the possibility of a bootloader/DT/kernel mismatch.

Thanks,
Richard