From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com (yw-out-2324.google.com [74.125.46.30]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6562DDE45 for ; Tue, 12 May 2009 15:22:42 +1000 (EST) Received: by yw-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 2so1787271ywt.39 for ; Mon, 11 May 2009 22:22:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090512011219.GB18223@yookeroo.seuss> References: <4A0457BC.3040408@dlasys.net> <1242007203.7767.28.camel@concordia> <4A07C664.6040609@dlasys.net> <4A085612.9050602@dlasys.net> <4A089AC8.9080704@dlasys.net> <20090512011219.GB18223@yookeroo.seuss> From: Grant Likely Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 23:22:21 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: device trees. To: Grant Likely , "David H. Lynch Jr." , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org 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: , On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:12 PM, David Gibson wrote: > On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 05:09:27PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: >> In other words; having your bootloader support FDT is preferred, but >> not required. > > I wouldn't even go so far as to say it's preferred. =A0IMO, people have > gone a bit prematurely keen on moving devtree handling into the > firmware. =A0Putting it in the firmware has a number of advantages, but > it also has a number of non-trivial disadvantages. I disagree. The more I work with it, the more I appreciate the advantage of decoupling the kernel image file from the hardware description. It is valuable being able to build a single image file that boots on a wide range of boards because the device tree passed in by firmware. I'm not downplaying the disadvantages and problems, but I still hold the view that the striving for generic multiplatform kernel images is worth the effort. ... but I do agree that hard linking the .dtb into firmware, or making the .dtb hard to upgrade is the way of madness. g. --=20 Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.