DTS syntax and DTC patches (was: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Machine description as data)

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006-hi6Y0CQ0nG0@public.gmane.org>]

[Adding the coreboot mailing list to CC. It's moderated for
non-subscribers, but it won't take long for legitimate mails to be
approved.]

On 13.02.2009 03:17, David Gibson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 03:11:20AM +0100, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>   
>> On 13.02.2009 01:43, David Gibson wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:26:46AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> I didn't mean to say they are a bad idea for FDTs, just that they're on
>>>> an awkward level of abstraction for QEMU configuration.  There, I'd
>>>> rather express a PCI address as "02:01.0" than as <0x00000220>.
>>>> Translating text to binary is the machine's job, not the user's.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Ah, I see what you mean.  Hrm, there are several possibilities here,
>>> we'll have to see which works out best for your purposes.
>>>       
>> Using the DTC version included in the coreboot v3 sources would solve
>> that problem and give you a readable PCI address representation.
>>     
>
> Hrm.. it would be nice if you'd co-ordinated with Jon and I about
> this.  Then we could have at least the bits which make sense in
> upstream dtc...
>   

Probably the biggest obstacle for a full merge right now is that the
coreboot v3 DTC is rather old and has been extended not only for a more
readable DTS syntax variant, but also for additional output modes (C
header and C code).

We (coreboot developers) are interested in reducing our diff with
upstream DTC in order to improve maintainability of our DTC code.


Regards,
Carl-Daniel