From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: Igor Grinberg <grinberg@compulab.co.il>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@ardb.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: Handling of modular boards
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 10:15:58 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FABE9BE.2010108@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FABB758.7000702@compulab.co.il>
On 05/10/2012 06:40 AM, Igor Grinberg wrote:
> On 05/05/12 01:09, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 10:33:57PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
>>> On the other hand, some of the issues we're trying to solve
>>> here for the kernel are also present in the boot loader, so
>>> this needs to do this anyway - whether by inserting new or
>>> modifying (enabling or disabling) existing properties in the DT
>>> is not really relevant here.
>
>> FWIW if the bootloader can usefully handle this stuff I think
>> that's a good approach but there is substantial variation in
>> quality of implementation between bootloaders and even when the
>> bootloader is a good one it's not always practical to update it
>> or the data it relies on.
>
> I agree on this (and also with Ben), all our boards/extensions/base
> boards/etc can be discovered in the boot loader and we will use the
> DT to pass the relevant information on the attached extensions and
> used base board.
>
> Also, most (if not all) of our boards/extensions have I2C EEPROM
> which describes the devices on that board/extension which is useful
> for building/extending the DT in the bootloader.
I believe that's true for all/many NVIDIA boards too.
But, duplicating all this in every bootloader might not make sense.
Sure there are some cases where the bootloader needs this information
(e.g. to load the kernel from an SD card that's on 1 of N plugin
boards), but there may be much information the bootloader doesn't care
about.
Would it make sense to write a DT-identifying-and-merging shim that
can be executed by the bootloader, create the final DT, and then jump
to the kernel?
Hmmm. That's probably a bad idea, since then it means needing e.g. I2C
drivers to read the ID EEPROMs, pinmux drivers, ... in the shim.
Perhaps the common shim idea makes sense, but we need a standardized
API it can use that all bootloaders provide for it to operate.
This is beginning to sound a lot like a UEFI byte code module (I
assume; I know little about them)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-10 16:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-04 18:58 Handling of modular boards Mark Brown
2012-05-04 19:34 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 20:07 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-04 20:33 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-05-04 20:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 20:54 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-05-04 21:03 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 21:09 ` Stephen Warren
2012-05-04 21:52 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-04 22:09 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-10 10:41 ` Ben Dooks
2012-05-10 12:40 ` Igor Grinberg
2012-05-10 16:15 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2012-05-11 6:15 ` Igor Grinberg
2012-05-08 12:26 ` Linus Walleij
2012-05-09 17:12 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-04 19:50 ` Stephen Warren
2012-05-04 20:38 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-05-04 20:59 ` Stephen Warren
2012-05-04 20:44 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-08 12:33 ` Linus Walleij
2012-05-09 8:41 ` Alessandro Rubini
2012-05-10 10:43 ` Ben Dooks
2012-05-10 16:11 ` Stephen Warren
2012-05-04 22:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04 23:40 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-04 23:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-05 0:03 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4FABE9BE.2010108@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=arnd@ardb.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=grinberg@compulab.co.il \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=sameo@linux.intel.com \
--cc=wd@denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).