From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Srinivas KANDAGATLA Subject: Re: [RFC:PATCH dtc-1.3.0] dtc: Add --strip-disabled option to dtc. Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:36:22 +0100 Message-ID: <5031F706.3050509@st.com> References: <1345034325-26656-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@st.com> <20120817060415.GC29724@truffula.fritz.box> <502E3632.70208@freescale.com> <502E52F3.7090404@st.com> <502E64F9.2020400@freescale.com> Reply-To: srinivas.kandagatla-qxv4g6HH51o@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <502E64F9.2020400-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: Timur Tabi Cc: "mmarek-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org" , Scott Wood , "devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org" , David Gibson List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 17/08/12 16:36, Timur Tabi wrote: > Srinivas KANDAGATLA wrote: >> If you know in advance that device on that SOC is broken, then I guess >> "Fail"/"Failed" can be used in status property. >> >> One user of this flag in kernel device trees is >> ./arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8313erdb.dts > /* Remove this (or change to "okay") if you have > * a REVA3 or later board, if you apply one of the > * workarounds listed in section 8.5 of the board > * manual, or if you are adapting this device tree > * to a different board. > */ > status = "fail"; > > I'm not sure this is the right way to do it. I agree, the way fail status is used is pretty much redundant to what "disabled" is used for. I think the device trees files should have status as "okay" or "ok" or "disabled" or skip status property totally. > Normally, the boot loader > should be able to detect the board revision, and it should dynamically set > the 'status'. We have other devices that fail if a work-around is not > applied, and we don't use this approach. > > But assuming that this really is the best approach, then it would make > sense for --strip-disabled to leave this node in the dtb, because > otherwise there would be no way to re-enable it. --strip-disabled should still get rid for nodes marked as failed as-well, because fail means something serious and un-recoverable. I think bootloader should not even consider nodes with status as fail, as the device is unlikely to become operational without repair. >