From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from motgate2.mot.com (motgate2.mot.com [144.189.100.101]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 000792BDB3 for ; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:11:23 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <35fb2e59040930165327f2dd59@mail.gmail.com> References: <35fb2e59040930165327f2dd59@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <87127382-1357-11D9-8EFC-000393DBC2E8@freescale.com> From: Kumar Gala Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:11:03 -0500 To: Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: bi_recs List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > > But on the other hand, I've given up a long time ago trying to > enforce any > > kind of sane model on ppc32 because the embedded folks only care > about having > > a quick ugly broken hack to work with their board, thus the > explosion of > > various incompatible boot_info structures that we have nowadays. > > Yes indeed. It's ugly and needs fixing so I'll take a look at it - I > just don't want to do this if everyone here already knows of a better > solution which will work. > > Then Xilinx et al can generate memory maps and we can head towards > having a single kernel binary bootable on multiple different ppc > boards. I would be nice to have an extensive and dynamic way to pass info from the bootloader to the kernel. I believe that Wolfgang has stated he would be willing to change u-boot to match. I'd be willing to fixup and move Freescale boards over to use something as long as we get u-boot to support it as well. I've been told that ARM has a solution, in place, to this problem that might always be worth looking at. - kumar