From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com (e34.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.152]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e34.co.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1340DDEA3 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:36:51 +1100 (EST) Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lB4MalLj003466 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 17:36:47 -0500 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id lB4Mabrn091476 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 15:36:38 -0700 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id lB4Maam5013249 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 15:36:37 -0700 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 16:34:09 -0600 From: Josh Boyer To: Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: Merge dtc Message-ID: <20071204163409.6d03c7a5@zod.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <18261.53985.700234.923526@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <20071016050217.GA9052@localhost.localdomain> <1196733544.13978.201.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <18261.53985.700234.923526@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Gibson , David Woodhouse , David List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:21:21 +1100 Paul Mackerras wrote: > David Woodhouse writes: > > > I think this is a bad idea -- it's hardly a difficult for those people > > who _do_ need dts to obtain it separately. > > The trouble is that it's not just people who are making a kernel for a > specific embedded board that need dtc. These days anyone who wants to > try cross-compiling a powerpc kernel and does a make allyesconfig, or > who picks cell_defconfig or ps3_defconfig to try, needs dtc if their > kernel build is to go all the way through and give them an exit status > of 0. I can see that for people who are trying to do the right thing > and compile-test their patch across architectures, it's annoying that > powerpc has an extra external requirement when no other architecture > does, and it usually just means they don't compile-test on powerpc. > > Of the various options for solving this, including dtc in the kernel > sources seems best to me. Using that same reasoning, should we merge a mkimage patch for the boards that use U-Boot? (That's a serious question, not a smart-ass response) josh