[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140424160545.GE1735@arch.cereza>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 13:05:45 -0300
From: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ley Foon Tan <lftan@...era.com>
Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, lftan.linux@...il.com,
cltang@...esourcery.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/28] nios2: Device tree support
On Apr 22, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 18 April 2014, Ley Foon Tan wrote:
>
> Are these all synthesized devices, or is there also some hardwired
> logic? It often makes sense to split out the reusable parts into
> a separate .dtsi file that gets included by every implementation.
>
In case you are not aware of this, devicetree files for Nios-II
SoCs are produced through an automated tool calle sopc2dts:
http://www.alterawiki.com/wiki/Sopc2dts
http://git.rocketboards.org/sopc-tools.git/
You feed it with a sopcinfo file (AFAIK, Altera's specific format) and
you obtain a full-fledged devicetree source file. Usually it works
out-of-the-box, although I like to go over it and fix ranges, whitespaces,
and do some cleaning.
So I'm wondering -given we have such superb tool- why would we want to
include the devicetree source's in the kernel?
First, we'll be only supporting a *specific* configuration. Second, the
dts is trivially easy to obtain.
The binding documentation should be enough specification, and there's no
need for further reference or examples.
--
Ezequiel GarcĂa, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
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