From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com (gateway-1237.mvista.com [63.81.120.158]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 463B867B67 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 02:59:29 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 10:03:23 -0700 From: "Mark A. Greer" To: Jon Loeliger Subject: Re: RFC: Location for Device Tree Sources? Message-ID: <20060809170323.GC17759@mag.az.mvista.com> References: <1154464346.19994.4.camel@cashmere.sps.mot.com> <1155122309.4040.94.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1155128205.3944.1.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20060809163839.GB17759@mag.az.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:48:34AM -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote: > So, like, the other day "Mark A. Greer" mumbled: > > > We're only talking about the _source_ files. The .dts files. Not the > > > binary trees themselves. > > > > > > The basic summary is that having a .dts in the kernel for every > > > defconfig would be good. (I think that was the summary anyway.) > > > > That's my understanding too. A 1-1 matching of default config files > > and dts files kept in the kernel src trees. > > And the keen observer who watches Paul's tree will have > noticed that the first DTS file, mpc8641_hpcn.dts, has already > been added to arch/powerpc/boot/dts! > > > Any extra dts files > > ... of which there are none... Yet... > > ...would be kept whereever dtc src is stored (i.e., jdl.com). > > I haven't heard jdl agree to this, though. :) > > Sure. No problem by me. > > Though I do have a question WRT the notion of the libdt... > > So, if I understand this proposal correctly, making libdt.a > would mean that we will now have to link the kernel against > this new, external dependency library. It would also mean > that we'd have to link U-Boot against this new, external > library as well. > > Did I misunderstand or is everyone hip, jiggie and down with that? I thought the proposal was a master copy kept by you and then the various users would copy it over when they wanted. >>From Hollis' email (http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/2006-August/023882.htm): "I think we should turn it into a library in the dtc source tree. The various projects using it could then include snapshots (to avoid dependencies)." I think that means we copy. Mark