Re: [PATCH 0/2] Character literal parsing

[David Gibson <david-xT8FGy+AXnRB3Ne2BGzF6laj5H9X9Tb+@public.gmane.org>]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 01:22:13PM -0700, Anton Staaf wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Brown <davidb-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Does this mean that the dtc inside the kernel is going to be the
> > required tool to use to build device trees?  This change doesn't change
> > the DTB format, so it's as much of a concern, but was wondering if we're
> > intending to keep things compatible.
> >
> 
> To be honest, I don't know enough to say either way.  I am using the
> character literals in a device tree that is used to configure a
> single firmware image for multiple boards.  That device tree is not
> currently passed on to the kernel.
> 
> Your question makes me think that there are two device tree compilers that I
> should be paying attention to, is that the case?  Or was it a more general
> comment about diverging from a historic syntax for device tree
> source files?

Oh, yes, forgot to mention that.

If you want to make extensions to dtc, you should do it to the
upstream dtc at git://git.jdl.com/software/dtc.git.  The in-kernel
version is just a irregularly updated snapshot of that one.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson