Re: Flat OF Device Tree for ppc32 [was: Platform bus/ppc sys model...]

[Jakob Viketoft <jakob.viketoft@bitsim.se>]

Hi!

You don't happen to have a patch of your current work against one of the 
trees (83xx and 85xx)? It would be much easier to do work in parallell, 
and I'd be happy to do it on the "Xilinx" tree (and help out where I 
can, of course).

Jon Masters and Andrei: Does Jon Loeliger's implementation plan sound 
alright to you? Since you seem quite full-handed on your end anyway, 
Jon, I'll be happy to do the work needed unless anyone has any objections...

Cheers!

	/Jakob

Jon Loeliger wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 06:33, Jon Masters wrote:
> 
>>Kumar Gala wrote:
>>
>>|> My intention was to give a device tree structure to the kernel at boot
>>|> time via a (pseudo?) pointer in bd_info or similar. 
> 
> 
>>This got resurrected recently. 
> 
> 
> Hi!
> 
> 
>>| I think this is reasonable.  The best device tree would be a flattened
>>| OF tree since we are trying to move the world in that direction.  Jon
>>| Masters around?
>>
>>Yes, but I've been tied up with worky and magazine stuff again. If
>>someone wants to work with me then this might actually happen.
> 
> 
> Hi Jon,
> 
> I'm here and actively(!) working on it now.   Here is the very
> rough plan as Kumar and I have discussed it.  Please feel free
> to comment on it or offer suggestions.  Ben has suggested that
> I start with the "second step" below.  I'd like to do a round
> of cleanup first.
> 
> So far, I have taken the first step of isolating the references
> to the global __res[] variable into one file and replacing all
> references to the data in the bd_t structure with a thin, shim
> layer of function calls that are nominally into an OF-like
> interface.  I have done this for all the 85xx and 83xx boards
> in my development tree, and am working on the others now.
> This step effectively isolates the __res[] references to one
> file where a well defined interface can be created to pose as
> an OF Device Tree layer (briefly).
> 
> As a follow-up second step, I plan on introducing essentially
> the same code currently in ppc64 to handle the flat device tree
> and provide an interface to that data in exactly the same manner
> as the ppc64 currently has.  I understand the desire to have the
> flat-tree handling be "outside the kernel".
> 
> As a third step, the shim layer will be rewritten/augmented to
> use the actual OF device tree data where it currently fronts
> for the bd_t data.
> 
> Finally, as time permits and maintainers allow (read: prod),
> the other (not 85xx, not 83xx) boards can have their setup code
> converted to use the "real" OF device tree function calls.
> 
> When all of that is done, the shim layer can be removed, as needed.
> 
> 
> Oh, yeah.  Um, also on my plate will be to construct the
> original flat-tree blob in U-Boot to be handed to the kernel.
> (I'll start with 85xx and 83xx, naturlich.)
> 
> We have not yet decided on the layout of that tree to determine
> where all the attributes and devices really belong.  I will
> also discuss with Wolfgang and crew how to generate that tree
> over in U-Boot land.
> 
> Right?
>  
> Thanks,
> jdl
>