From: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
Cc: Pantelis Antoniou <panto@antoniou-consulting.com>,
Michael Bohan <mbohan@codeaurora.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
<rob.herring@calxeda.com>, <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
<david.daney@cavium.com>, <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of/lib: Export fdt routines to modules
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:30:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52616228.80002@caviumnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52615A64.9040803@gmail.com>
On 10/18/2013 08:57 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
[...]
>
> Unflattening is definitely the right
> direction to go here.
>
I wonder if that is really true.
The device tree in question is very short lived, and used to control the
configuration of some hardware device when loading the driver.
The use of it is completely contained within a single driver (at least
that is my understanding), it is not information that needs to be shared
system wide.
Given that it is a driver implementation issue, rather than making
things work nicely system wide, I don't think it really matters what is
done.
It may be that the overhead of unflattening the tree and then freeing
it, is much greater than just extracting a few things from the FDT.
That said, I don't really have a preference for what is done. My
original questions were targeted at understanding this particular use case.
David Daney
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-18 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-16 23:27 [PATCH] of/lib: Export fdt routines to modules Michael Bohan
2013-10-16 23:39 ` David Daney
2013-10-17 0:27 ` Michael Bohan
2013-10-17 4:54 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-10-17 23:51 ` Michael Bohan
2013-10-18 0:44 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-10-18 2:54 ` Michael Bohan
2013-10-18 13:28 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2013-10-18 15:57 ` Rob Herring
2013-10-18 16:16 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-10-18 16:30 ` David Daney [this message]
2013-10-18 19:32 ` Michael Bohan
2013-10-18 21:20 ` Rob Herring
2013-10-19 1:49 ` Michael Bohan
2013-10-19 3:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-10-18 18:38 ` Mark Rutland
2013-10-19 1:41 ` Michael Bohan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52616228.80002@caviumnetworks.com \
--to=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=david.daney@cavium.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=mbohan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=panto@antoniou-consulting.com \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
--cc=robherring2@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox