[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100706.001607.186316276.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:16:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: grant.likely@...retlab.ca
Cc: dilinger@...ued.net, devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, cjb@...top.org, wmb@...top.org,
pgf@...top.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
benh@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] sparc: break out some prom device-tree building
code out into drivers/of
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 01:00:06 -0600
> I'm curious... what are your plans here? Will you be keeping OF alive
> between kexec()? Will the new kernel get the entire device tree from
> fdt, or will it still be talking to OF? How will the fdt fragments as
> Andres described above fit into sparc kexec (as opposed to generating
> one big tree as in his first option)?
On certain sparc64 systems, I have to stop making PROM calls early
in the boot right after I fetch the device tree into the kernel.
So yes for a kexec() I'll have to pass an fdt or similar to the
child kernel.
It could be a big linear fdt buffer, or fragments, it really doesn't
matter all that much actually.
--
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