Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6qdl-sabresd: Do not place regulator nodes under simple-bus

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Shawn Guo [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:57:36PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:

quoted

As it stands, the dts are buggy. I can appreciate that you don't feel
this is important, but I do. It's not just an IMX issue, there is
widespread misunderstanding and abuse of simple-bus.

Said abuse is relying on current Linux implementation details, and that
can and will create problems if and when probing code is changed.

The reality is the code already gets no chance to change on this regard,
considering the requirement that we need to maintain the interface
between kernel and DT as ABI.  The dts have been there like this for
10 kernel releases or so.

What breakage do you see with this patch?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 03:22:05PM -0200, Fabio Estevam wrote:

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Shawn Guo [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:57:36PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:

quoted

As it stands, the dts are buggy. I can appreciate that you don't feel
this is important, but I do. It's not just an IMX issue, there is
widespread misunderstanding and abuse of simple-bus.

Said abuse is relying on current Linux implementation details, and that
can and will create problems if and when probing code is changed.

The reality is the code already gets no chance to change on this regard,
considering the requirement that we need to maintain the interface
between kernel and DT as ABI.  The dts have been there like this for
10 kernel releases or so.

What breakage do you see with this patch?

I'm not talking about this patch.  I'm replying to Mark's comment saying
some day the kernel probing code is changed.

Shawn