[Ksummit-2013-discuss] [RFC] of: Allow for experimental device tree bindings

[Wolfram Sang]

> > I'd even go further and use "unstable-" as the prefix instead of "!"
> > which is way more explicit.
> 
> I guess unstable- is as good as anything. I personally think that "!" is
> disturbing enough to the eye to make it abundantly clear that something
> is fishy.

"!" marks the binding as "special" whatever that is. A busy person might
decide to not look that up as long as it works right now. "unstable-"
(or maybe "unstable!-" ;)) is explicit so people know what they get.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20131023/01da0495/attachment.sig>