From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Schwebel Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Device Tree on ARM platform Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 12:33:35 +0200 Message-ID: <20090528103335.GW6805@pengutronix.de> References: <20090527175609.GB31861@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <1243496236.3171.140.camel@pasglop> <20090528091513.GA14789@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090528.025739.16559619.davem@davemloft.net> <1243505493.5573.29.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1243505493.5573.29.camel@pasglop> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: David Miller , devicetree-discuss@ozlabs.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, scottwood@freescale.com, yuan-bo.ye@motorola.com, timur@freescale.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 08:11:33PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > The possibilities are endless. _BUT_ it does require some careful > thinking to get things right. To that extent, I do agree with Russell > that rather than a "violent" conversion, ARM should first try things out > as an opt-in for a few platforms and see how it goes. I think that the overall discussion goes into a very good direction. The level of agreement is not as low as it might look like, I agree with most of what David Gibson, benh and rmk have said so far; the problems we've seen have been well identified. In the end it's probably a matter of finding enough time to actually implement for example a prototype for PXA. rsc -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |