[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1511281232440.22569@knanqh.ubzr>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 12:34:23 -0500 (EST)
From: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@...il.com>,
Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...ian.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] arm: boot: store ATAGs structure into DT
"/chosen/linux,atags" entry
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 06:28:50PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > > I don't mind creating the /proc/atags compatibility hack from the kernel
> > > for a DT based N700 kernel, as long as we limit it as much as we can
> > > to the machines that need it. Leaving a board file for the N700 in place
> > > that contains the procfs code (and not much more) seems reasonable
> > > here, as we are talking about a board specific hack and the whole point
> > > appears to be running unmodified user space.
> > >
> > > Regarding how to get the data into the kernel in the first place, my
> > > preferred choice would still be to have an intermediate bootloader
> > > such as pxa-impedance-matcher, but I won't complain if others are
> > > happy enough about putting it into the ATAGS compat code we already
> > > have, as long as it's limited to the boards we know need it.
> >
> > Assuming you have a N700 board file for special procfs code, then why
> > not getting at the atags in memory where the bootloader has put them
> > directly from that same board file? This way it'll really be limited to
> > the board we know needs it and the special exception will be contained
> > to that one file. Amongst the machine specific hooks, there is one that
> > gets invoked early during boot before those atags are overwritten.
>
> I've already suggested that.
Good. And Arnd likes the idea too. So we might be converging at last
which is a good thing.
Nicolas
--
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