From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from az33egw02.freescale.net (az33egw02.freescale.net [192.88.158.103]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "az33egw02.freescale.net", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 166D8DE099 for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:02:31 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <49F066DC.402@freescale.com> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:02:20 -0500 From: Timur Tabi MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kumar Gala , Scott Wood , Linuxppc-dev Development Subject: Re: removing get_immrbase()?? References: <49EF7B11.2000006@freescale.com> <49EF7B1C.2080105@freescale.com> <282847E1-AE1A-44EF-9D18-AF2884105FA5@kernel.crashing.org> <49EF8E3A.4060304@freescale.com> <5D0145E3-0A98-429E-8D53-1A8DF4216462@kernel.crashing.org> <20090423022610.GA19376@yookeroo.seuss> In-Reply-To: <20090423022610.GA19376@yookeroo.seuss> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , David Gibson wrote: > It's not so much point of view as situation. Putting the device tree > in the firmware and putting the device tree in the kernel are both > valid choices, with their own distinct advantages and drawbacks. I was under the impression that the reason we put the device trees in the kernel is because we didn't have a better place to put them. Keeping them in the kernel repository was just convenient. So I personally don't consider the *location* of the DTS files to be a basis for deciding what they really mean. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale