[PATCH] [POWERPC] Make it blatently clear; 5200 device tree is not yet stable

From: Grant Likely <redacted>

---
Paulus,

Please apply for 2.6.20.  This is documentation only, but I don't want
to give people false assumptions about the stability of the 5200 device
tree bindings

 .../powerpc/mpc52xx-device-tree-bindings.txt       |    9 +++++++++
 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200.dts                 |    8 ++++++++
 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200b.dts                |    8 ++++++++
 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/powerpc/mpc52xx-device-tree-bindings.txt b/Documentation/powerpc/mpc52xx-device-tree-bindings.txt
index 7fb3b8a..e90efe3 100644
--- a/Documentation/powerpc/mpc52xx-device-tree-bindings.txt
+++ b/Documentation/powerpc/mpc52xx-device-tree-bindings.txt

@@ -4,6 +4,15 @@ MPC52xx Device Tree Bindings
 (c) 2006 Secret Lab Technologies Ltd
 Grant Likely <grant.likely at secretlab.ca>
 
+********** DRAFT ***********
+* WARNING: Do not depend on definiton remaining static between
+* kernel versions.  The 5200 device tree conventions are still in flux
+* and could change without notice.  Keep an eye on the linuxppc-dev
+* mailing list for more details
+*
+* Hopefully by 2.6.21 it will be stable.  ---gcl, Jan 13, 2007
+********** DRAFT ***********
+
 I - Introduction
 ================
 Boards supported by the arch/powerpc architecture require device tree be

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200.dts b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200.dts
index a8efb59..e953568 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200.dts
+++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200.dts

@@ -10,6 +10,14 @@
  * option) any later version.
  */
 
+/*
+ * WARNING: Do not depend on this tree remaining static between
+ * kernel versions.  The 5200 device tree conventions are still in flux
+ * and could change without notice.
+ *
+ * Hopefully by 2.6.21 it will be stable.  ---gcl, Jan 13, 2007
+ */
+
 / {
 	model = "Lite5200";
 	compatible = "lite5200\0lite52xx\0mpc5200\0mpc52xx";

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200b.dts b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200b.dts
index 1aabee4..c3123be 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200b.dts
+++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200b.dts

@@ -10,6 +10,14 @@
  * option) any later version.
  */
 
+/*
+ * WARNING: Do not depend on this tree remaining static between
+ * kernel versions.  The 5200 device tree conventions are still in flux
+ * and could change without notice.
+ *
+ * Hopefully by 2.6.21 it will be stable.  ---gcl, Jan 13, 2007
+ */
+
 / {
 	model = "Lite5200b";
 	compatible = "lite5200b\0lite52xx\0mpc5200b\0mpc52xx";

-- 
1.4.3.rc2.g0503

Please apply for 2.6.20.  This is documentation only, but I don't want
to give people false assumptions about the stability of the 5200 device
tree bindings

Good idea.

+********** DRAFT ***********
+* WARNING: Do not depend on definiton remaining static between
+* kernel versions.  The 5200 device tree conventions are still in flux
+* and could change without notice.  Keep an eye on the linuxppc-dev
+* mailing list for more details
+*
+* Hopefully by 2.6.21 it will be stable.  ---gcl, Jan 13, 2007
+********** DRAFT ***********

But could you please rephrase in a way that doesn't suggest
the *kernel* defines what the device bindings are?  They are
only documented in the kernel tree right now, sure, but that's
not the same thing ;-)


Segher

On 1/13/07, Segher Boessenkool [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Please apply for 2.6.20.  This is documentation only, but I don't want
to give people false assumptions about the stability of the 5200 device
tree bindings

Good idea.

Thanks.  :)

quoted

+********** DRAFT ***********
+* WARNING: Do not depend on definiton remaining static between
+* kernel versions.  The 5200 device tree conventions are still in flux
+* and could change without notice.  Keep an eye on the linuxppc-dev
+* mailing list for more details
+*
+* Hopefully by 2.6.21 it will be stable.  ---gcl, Jan 13, 2007
+********** DRAFT ***********

But could you please rephrase in a way that doesn't suggest
the *kernel* defines what the device bindings are?  They are
only documented in the kernel tree right now, sure, but that's
not the same thing ;-)

Gah!  Good point.  I do *not* what to go down the "this is for Linux
only" path.  In fact, perhaps I should start looking for a better
place to host this stuff.   Maybe freescale or power.org?

g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc. P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
grant.likely@secretlab.ca
(403) 399-0195

In fact, perhaps I should start looking for a better
place to host this stuff.   Maybe freescale or power.org?

I am setting up a Wiki to host "all things Open Firmware",
including new bindings etc.  No guarantee of success of
course, but many people seem to be interested.  It should
be great for the device binding stuff PowerPC Linux needs.

Stay tuned...


Segher