Re: [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: dts: samsung: DTS for v5.12

From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	arm-soc <arm@kernel.org>, SoC Team <soc@kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"moderated list:ARM/SAMSUNG EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES" 
	<linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
	Sylwester Nawrocki <snawrocki@kernel.org>,
	DTML <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: dts: samsung: DTS for v5.12
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 09:25:31 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdUSRZ+Fho4OG3xZayzOrFnJXxomT3q16vu_Jai6Lb7hxg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210208231040.GF351084@piout.net>

Hi Alexandre,

On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 12:10 AM Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> On 08/02/2021 23:14:02+0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 10:35 PM Alexandre Belloni
> > <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> > > Are there really any platforms with the dtb built into the firmware?
> > > I feel like this is a mythical creature used to scare people into keeping
> > > the DTB ABI stable. Aren't all the distribution already able to cope
> > > with keeping DTB and kernel in sync?
> >
> > I think most traditional PowerPC systems fall into this category, most
>
> My understanding was that the traditional PPC systems had a small device
> tree and usually are not affected by driver changes but I may be wrong.

They were much simpler than a modern SoC, with most functionality
implemented by modularity (e.g. PCI devices, I still like 'compatible
= "pci1186,100"'[1] ;-)
And the bindings were simple and stable (i.e. they did exist before the
platform was shipped).

[1] http://users.telenet.be/geertu/Linux/PPC/pci/ethernetAT4/

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds