From: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Dan Malek <dan@embeddededge.com>
Cc: jonathan@jonmasters.org, linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: bi_recs
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 14:53:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041004215331.GC32692@smtp.west.cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <80A86B0F-1624-11D9-A7BA-003065F9B7DC@embeddededge.com>
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 12:43:21PM -0400, Dan Malek wrote:
>
> On Oct 4, 2004, at 8:45 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
>
> >I think that's an approach which works up to a point. It's nice to
> >have a hierachy of devices like with OF because then we can infer
> >things like order of devices on a bus that need to be shutdown for a
> >suspend.
>
> The problem with a hierarchy of devices is that isn't the kind of
> information we need in an embedded system. With the embedded
> system, you have a pretty good idea what you have. We need
> _environment_ information, such as MAC addresses, memory sizes
> and other information tidbits are are likely to vary within an embedded
> system. This is something an OF tree doesn't give us.
There's nothing saying that what we know to Always Be True must be Put
Into The Tree. We can just have say, /ethN/mac for the mac address we
yank out of firmware somehow, but leave the addresses we know as part of
the OCP table, or whatever.
No one is saying we have to have a tree that fully describes every bit
of the system. Just a tree that describes what we don't know at compile
time. The tree for what we know is in OCP already. :)
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-04 21:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-30 23:02 bi_recs Jon Masters
2004-09-30 23:21 ` bi_recs Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-09-30 23:53 ` bi_recs Jon Masters
2004-10-01 3:11 ` bi_recs Kumar Gala
2004-10-01 3:40 ` bi_recs Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-01 11:14 ` bi_recs Jon Masters
2004-10-01 14:53 ` [PATCH] for linuxppc-2.4 tree: adds Memec 2VP7 / 2VP4 board support Andrei Konovalov
2004-10-01 21:54 ` bi_recs Jon Masters
2004-10-02 4:35 ` bi_recs Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-02 12:59 ` bi_recs Jon Masters
2004-10-01 22:06 ` bi_recs Tom Rini
2004-10-04 6:07 ` bi_recs Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-04 12:09 ` bi_recs Mark Chambers
2004-10-04 12:45 ` bi_recs Jon Masters
2004-10-04 16:43 ` bi_recs Dan Malek
2004-10-04 21:53 ` Tom Rini [this message]
2004-10-04 20:20 ` bi_recs Wolfgang Denk
2004-10-04 14:29 ` bi_recs Tom Rini
2004-10-04 14:41 ` bi_recs Matt Porter
2004-10-04 15:00 ` bi_recs Kumar Gala
2004-10-04 15:06 ` bi_recs Jon Masters
2004-10-04 15:47 ` bi_recs Kumar Gala
2004-10-04 20:18 ` bi_recs Wolfgang Denk
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=20041004215331.GC32692@smtp.west.cox.net \
--to=trini@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=dan@embeddededge.com \
--cc=jonathan@jonmasters.org \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
/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).