linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] MIPS: Move device-tree files to a common location

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 22 Aug 2014 17:24:52 -0700
From:	Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@...omium.org>
To:	Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>
Cc:	David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
	Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@...tec.com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Jayachandran C <jchandra@...adcom.com>,
	Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>,
	James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] MIPS: Move device-tree files to a common location

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Andrew Bresticker
> <abrestic@...omium.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 1:57 PM, David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com> wrote:
>>> On 08/22/2014 01:42 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 21, 2014 3:05 PM, "Andrew Bresticker" <abrestic@...omium.org
>>>> <mailto:abrestic@...omium.org>> wrote:
>>>>  >
>>>>  > To be consistent with other architectures and to avoid unnecessary
>>>>  > makefile duplication, move all MIPS device-trees to arch/mips/boot/dts
>>>>  > and build them with a common makefile.
>>>>
>>>> I recall reading that the ARM organization for DTS files was a bit
>>>> unfortunate and should have been something like:
>>>>
>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/<vendor>/
>>>>
>>>> Is this something we should do for the MIPS and update the other
>>>> architectures to follow that scheme?
>>>
>>>
>>> If we choose not to intermingle .dts files from all the vendors in a single
>>> directory, why do anything at all?  Currently the .dts files for a vendor
>>> are nicely segregated with the rest of the vendors code under a single
>>> directory.
>>>
>>> Personally I think things are fine as they are.  Any common code remaining
>>> in the Makefiles could be moved to the scripts directory for a smaller
>>> change.
>>
>> Assuming we don't move them to a common location just to segregate
>> them again, it makes MIPS consistent with every other architecture
>> (not just ARM!) using DT.  It also makes it easier to introduce common
>> changes later on, like the 'dtbs' or 'dtbs_install' make targets.
>
> I think having dts files under a predictable location is a good idea,
> especially if it allows common code/targets as "dtbs".
>
> Maybe a totally insane idea, but how this for having the cake and eating it too:
>
> arch/mips/boot/dts/*.dts => dts files to be built along side the kernel as .dtbs
>
> arch/mips/<mach>/*.dts => dts files built into the kernel
>
> (the ../*.dts isn't meant as they should be in the top directory, just
> somewhere in that sub tree)
>
> Because I can see a use case where you want both. For example octeon
> uses generic device tree boards to use as a basis if the bootloader
> did not provide one/is too old, but maybe also provide dts files for
> known boards, which shouldn't be included in the kernel binary itself.

I'm not sure I like having DTs in both the common and per-platform
directories, but this is a use case I've been think about as well.
What I'm thinking is: have "make dtbs" build all applicable DTBs for
the selected platform and, based on other config options, build some
subset of those DTBs in the kernel.  For example: if CONFIG_RALINK,
"make dtbs" builds all the {mt,rt}*_eval.dtb's and, when building the
kernel, one of those dtbs may be built into the kernel based on which
CONFIG_DTB_RT* option is selected (if any).  I'm not sure yet what the
cleanest way to do that is though.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/