From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Loeliger Subject: [Fwd: Re: [U-Boot-Users] using a flat device tree to drive u-boot config] Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:27:11 -0500 Message-ID: <488F28BF.6030902@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org To: devicetree-discuss-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] using a flat device tree to drive u-boot config Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:59:21 -0500 From: Scott Wood To: Ben Warren CC: u-boot-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Users , Kumar Gala Ben Warren wrote: > Uh, yeah. I like the idea of a central repo for hardware info, and > the device tree concept is good. My point is that the syntax, while > concise and exact, can be intimidating. Just look at the amount of > traffic on the mailing lists of people that don't understand what all > the fields mean when specifying IRQs etc. Anything we can do to make > it less so for noobies is a good thing for everybody. Sure, no argument there -- enhancing the dts syntax with symbolic constants, computational expressions, and macros should make things like interrupt specifiers and maps a lot clearer. -Scott