From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from kirsty.vergenet.net ([202.4.237.240]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1T9Y5Q-0001eI-0u for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 09:09:20 +0000 Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 18:09:14 +0900 From: Simon Horman Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add device-tree support to kexec-tools for ARM Message-ID: <20120906090914.GA8673@verge.net.au> References: <1346845443-32242-1-git-send-email-matthew.leach@arm.com> <20120905123850.GA11453@verge.net.au> <000001cd8b73$82e6b4f0$88b41ed0$@leach@arm.com> <20120906032901.GG6432@verge.net.au> <20120906090128.GA858@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120906090128.GA858@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: kexec-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Will Deacon Cc: Matthew Leach , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" Hi Will, On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 10:01:28AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi guys, > > On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 04:29:02AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 03:34:09PM +0100, Matthew Leach wrote: > > > Also, I use a > > > different segment for the dtb rather than appending it to the > > > zImage; I think this approach would be better as it is less > > > restrictive, however a kernel patch is required to set r2 to the > > > appropriate address on entry to the new kernel. What are your > > > thoughts? > > > > I would prefer to avoid requiring kernel changes unless necessary - > > the kernels some of the boards I work with require DT since 3.5. > > However, I am happy to discuss this further, there certainly is > > merit to a clean implementation. > > I had a quick look at both the approaches and it looks like Matthew requires > changes to the host kernel (to load the dtb correctly) and Simon requires > changes to the target kernel (to pick up the dtb correctly). Could you explain a little why you feel my patch requires a change to the target kernel? > I would personally prefer changing the host, as the target should ideally > have no knowledge about the kexec. Given that kexec has not supported DT on > ARM so far and these patches have no affect on the existing ATAG mechanism, > I don't think there is a problem with making changes to the kernel. Agreed. > I also wouldn't like to hedge my bets on CONFIG_ARM_APPENDED_DTB staying > around forever -- it's intended as convenience for legacy bootloaders rather > than something that should be used in preference to passing the dtb via r2. Also agreed. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec