Re: RFC: Location for Device Tree Sources?

On Aug 3, 2006, at 8:54 AM, Tom Rini wrote:

On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 04:32:33AM -0500, Milton Miller wrote:

quoted

I don't think we need to bump the dt version every time we make a tree
content requirements change.  We need to bump when we add or
change fields in the struct header, change internal layout, or change 
how
we pass  information through the tree.  Certianly not because someone
left things out of their tree.

But "content requirements change" isn't the same as "left things out of
their tree".  It sounds, and I haven't seen the changes, so I'm not
certain that the meaning behind a field changed.  Something like that
should change the dt version.  New fields aren't a problem.  Changing
existing fields meaning in incompatible ways is a problem.

Agreed.   I too haven't looked at the change, but thought it was the
former.