[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fa686aa40905280739u43270779w7023bfceebff230d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 08:39:40 -0600
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>,
devicetree-discuss <devicetree-discuss@...abs.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com>,
Janboe Ye <yuan-bo.ye@...orola.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Device Tree on ARM platform
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> For ARM the model could be to use the machine number to load a device
> tree built into the kernel (these trees would slowly migrate into the
> firmware). After the device tree is selected the machine specific code
> would add the override function pointers. Unified OF aware device
> drivers would load using the device tree. These drivers would find the
> function pointers and use them to implement machine specific features.
Nagging point: it is not encouraged to move the device tree into the
firmware. It is useful to *pass* the device tree via the kernel, but
hard linking it in is the way of pain because it makes updates hard.
This is probably what you meant, but I wanted to clarify.
g.
--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists