Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Device Tree on ARM platform | From | Peter Korsgaard <> | Date | Wed, 27 May 2009 17:41:47 +0200 |
| |
>>>>> "Robert" == Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@pengutronix.de> writes:
Hi,
Robert> - The whole concept is based on the assumption that bindings Robert> are defined *once*, then never to be changed again. As this Robert> is not true (check MPC5200 to find out what I mean), oftree Robert> wreckage is *the* main cause of new kernels not working on Robert> old bootloaders any more. Is there a solution of this Robert> problem? I have not seen a good idea how to avoid the Robert> constant change in definitions.
Just bundle the .dtb with the kernel and they'll always be in sync. I know this isn't really in the spirit of OF, but currently imho the only realistic solution.
I did a (nacked) patch to do this with the multi-image support in U-Boot some time ago:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/589/
Robert> - The oftree layering is fundamentally broken. We already Robert> have a sane abstraction for arbitrary hardware in the kernel: Robert> platform devices. Why not instanciate platform devices from Robert> a generic oftree core?
Robert> - Platform data makes it possible to store function Robert> pointers. There is no equivalent to this concept in Robert> oftree-land.
Yeah.
-- Bye, Peter Korsgaard
| |