From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-in-10.arcor-online.net (mail-in-10.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.arcor.de", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39797DDDF4 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:40:22 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <17875.53329.662052.612956@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <20070213060904.GA6214@localhost.localdomain> <20070213061026.5837FDDDE9@ozlabs.org> <9696D7A991D0824DBA8DFAC74A9C5FA302A1B705@az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net> <1171470754.4003.101.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <6206de08b7f12175bebe669291c66334@kernel.crashing.org> <9696D7A991D0824DBA8DFAC74A9C5FA302A1B86F@az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net> <9df9bf3adf511f4c1a7945e022fdd447@kernel.crashing.org> <9696D7A991D0824DBA8DFAC74A9C5FA302A1B8EF@az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net> <1171489360.20192.184.camel@localhost.localdomain> <122a66d49480520cf87cd748bbfc50bb@kernel.crashing.org> <17875.49565.444870.924729@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <6c90a73251f09d619498c77264a15fef@kernel.crashing.org> <17875.53329.662052.612956@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <65b693652fa034ed521e132a6142b3b7@kernel.crashing.org> From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/16] Add device tree for Ebony Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:40:13 +0100 To: Paul Mackerras Cc: David Gibson , Yoder Stuart-B08248 , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> Still, if you want to be compatible to "real OF" (and you >> do, otherwise you would have chosen a structure that is >> more appropriate for this goal), > > We don't require an OF device tree; When booting on real OF you do. > what we require is something that > provides a way to express what the kernel needs to know about the > hierarchy, interconnections and characteristics of the devices in the > system. Sure. You could have chosen a structure that is closer to the internal Linux structures. > That it looks strangely familiar to you is just a > coincidence. :) Heh suuuuuuuure :-) Segher