From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.247]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41BCDDF18 for ; Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:52:16 +1100 (EST) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b2so81810ana for ; Fri, 09 Nov 2007 06:52:13 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 07:52:11 -0700 From: "Grant Likely" Sender: glikely@secretlab.ca To: "Marian Balakowicz" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/13] [POWERPC] Add generic support for simple MPC5200 based boards In-Reply-To: <4734721A.6030603@semihalf.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <20071106222224.D67BA2479C@gemini.denx.de> <4734721A.6030603@semihalf.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 11/9/07, Marian Balakowicz wrote: > I can imagine that we may get into various trouble (or at least the > situation is less flexible) if we are unable to update .dts file along > with the kernel image on a deployed board. If so, then in fact there > is little sens in using "mpc5200-simple-platform" compatible. > > But how serious is that, does such situation frequently happen in > field? If we are able to update kernel image than what prevents .dts > file update? Not everything in the device tree is in the .dts file. U-boot or other firmware can modify the device tree before passing it to the kernel. It may not always be possible to update the device tree without also updating the firmware. I already know of changes that I'd like to make to the lite5200 tree which I know will break u-boot. That isn't the situation in this particular case, but we must always keep it in mind. Cheers, g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. grant.likely@secretlab.ca (403) 399-0195