lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
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] https://wiki.linaro.org/Process/Blueprints
>
> 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://git.secretlab.ca/git/linux-2.6 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.

Regards,
Amit


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-02-07 09:49    [W:0.091 / U:0.508 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site