From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kim Phillips Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:38:15 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] Device tree home In-Reply-To: <45AFC3A8.8090802@smiths-aerospace.com> References: <45AFC3A8.8090802@smiths-aerospace.com> Message-ID: <20070118153815.034af9fc.kim.phillips@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 13:59:52 -0500 Jerry Van Baren wrote: > Kim Phillips wrote: > > 3. does a subsystem maintainer get leverage into changes made in the > > higher level components of Das U-Boot? E.g., I'm still a firm > > believer that the device tree source should live in the bootloader ;) > > > > Kim > > Hi Kim, > > Back to the fdt/of methodology (I started a new thread since it is kind > of a new topic)... I have a hot project that I have not quite gotten to > yet to integrate the fdt more tightly into u-boot rather than it being > some magic wedged into bootm. > > The ultimate goal (for me) is to have an option where the u-boot env > gets stored in a fdt rather than the current env so that the fdt really > is native to u-boot. The goal would be that all the current env > commands would Just Work[tm]. > I'm not sure I understand the benefit of this - I thought the only parts of the device tree likely to get changed on the command line are the mac addresses and the chosen node's bootargs property, which today's u-boot handles well. My belief is merely that the device tree data should belong in the u-boot image; they are both equally board specific. Kim