linux-kernel - [Q] devicetree overlays

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:46:58 -0400
From:   Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
To:     Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc:     David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [Q] devicetree overlays

Pantelis, Frank,

A quick question about the state of devicetree overlays. There don't seem to
be many in-kernel overlay users (rcar and fpga only?). Does it make sense for
new projects to use them?

My situation is this: I have hardware which consists of several modules.
Knowledge about the type and location of these modules is located in an
on-board eeprom.

So now I need to assemble a devicetree, by puzzling various 'blobs' together.
This could be done in the bootloader, but also by a rcar-like driver, which
queries the eeprom and inserts devicetree fragments/overlays into a live kernel.

A couple of questions:
- are devicetree overlays here to stay? (given that there are 2 in-kernel users)
- does it make sense to solve the modular devicetree problem in a rcar-like
  fashion?
- is there perhaps a more canonical / idiomatic way to solve this?

Sven