On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Nicolas Pitre nicolas.pitre@linaro.org 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.