[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Device Tree on ARM status report
    On 11 Feb 05, Grant Likely wrote:
    > Hi all,
    > With several more engineers working on ARM device tree support, I'm
    > going to start collecting the status of all the work that is going on
    > (and I know about) and posting it in a regular status report,
    > hopefully weekly, for the next few months until the all of the major
    > features are implemented and working on several arm platforms. I'll
    > try to use roughly the following format:
    > 1) latest news and status updates
    > 2) list of tasks with current state and who is responsible for them in
    > the same format as Launchpad blueprint whiteboards[1]. (In fact, I'll
    > probably move much, if not all, of this into Launchpad anyway, in
    > which case these emails will be a summary of all the blueprints. not
    > all of us work with Linaro, but it is a useful method for tracking
    > progress).
    > 3) List of active engineers
    > [1]
    > Please read through and reply with comments/corrections. Feel free to
    > add or remove tasks from the list I've given below.
    > Thanks,
    > g.
    > 1 - Latest news
    > ---------------
    > - devicetree/arm on git:// has
    > everything needed to turn on basic device tree support for any
    > platform.
    > - Similarly, u-boot just needs to have the CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT defined to
    > turn on device tree support.
    > - IRQ handling is still a problem and only one interrupt controller
    > can be supported at the moment, but Lennert is working on a solution.
    > - I've posted a patch that will allow dt and non-dt device
    > registration to co-exist peacefully by snooping platform device
    > registrations. I could use some feedback and testing.
    > - hopefully the basic dt support can be merged into Nicolas' tree this
    > week if I get a cleaned up branch pushed out for him quickly.
    > 2 - Task status
    > ---------------
    > Core infrastructure:
    > [glikely] basic infrastructure to enable dt: DONE
    > [r-herring] Allow dtb to be located anywhere in RAM: DONE
    > [bones] Debug dtb corruption during init: INPROGRESS
    > [glikely] OF clock bindings: INPROGRESS

    Does this include the common clock framework that Jeremy had been working on?
    I see no mention of that explicitly, hence the question.


     \ /
      Last update: 2011-02-07 09:49    [W:0.033 / U:11.244 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site