Re: [PATCH 02/11] arm: use generic infrastructure for early params

[Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>]

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 6:33 AM, Rob Landley <rob-VoJi6FS/r0vR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 January 2010 16:31:00 Jeremy Kerr wrote:
>> Russell,
>>
>> > This is something which should be separate from the rest of the DT
>> > patch - could we have this as a patch which can be applied to the
>> > current kernel tree please?
>>
>> Sure, patch coming.
>>
>> The first three patches of this series (prefixed with arm:, rather than
>> arm- dt:) are all generic arm patches that don't specifically add device
>> tree support, would you like the other two as well?
>>
>> I'm in the process of rebasing my work onto a merge or your and Grant
>> Likely's test-devicetree branch, so future patches should be easier to work
>> with.
>>
>> Cheers,
>
> What's the current status on the device tree for arm stuff?
>
> I'm going through some of my todo bookmarks and stumbled across
> http://lwn.net/Articles/367752/ and I'd like to poke at it under qemu.
>
> I've been patching the kernel kconfig stuff to let me plug various different arm
> processors into a versatile board (because it's convinced that you can't
> possibly have an armv6l versatilepb and qemu's -cpu option makes that easy).
> Feeding in a device tree (or better yet teaching qemu to generate one) sounds
> like a better long-term approach...

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ARMDeviceTrees

g.