[Ksummit-2013-discuss] ARM topic: Is DT on ARM the solution, or is there something better?

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013, David Woodhouse wrote:

> 
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:05:58PM -0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 13:10 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Note that you are not describing a normal "DT scenario" here. You are
> >> >> describing a case in which we screwed up
> >> >
> >> > AKA "real world"
> >>
> >> No. Absolutely not. That was a screwup, and it needs to be *rare*. The
> >> excuses you present for it are crappy and uunacceptable.
> >
> > That's not helping. The fact is that is has happened.
> 
> It has happened, yes. But we're describing how things *shall* work going
> forward. Coping with existing mistakes is a slightly separate issue.
> (Albeit only slightly since mistakes *will* continue to happen, but
> hopefully more rarely so our defined processes for coping are based on the
> assumption that it should be rare)

No.  Doing so would only be an exercice in wishful thinking and a 
mistake.

Please let's get real.

Mistakes happen all the time.  And with all the diversity of hardware IP 
blocks out there, and all the different ways they're been connected, we 
have this combinatorial configuration explosion that absolutely no one 
can have the entire knowledge about.  Obstacles in the name of binding 
immutability is hurting more people than the amount of people who are 
benefiting from it right now.

So it is time IMHO that the description of how things *shall* work be 
itself revised.


Nicolas