public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH] arm: bootm: Boot kernel with U-Boot's FDT blob
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 12:25:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170112122540.GE10615@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1484074219.3144.24.camel@linaro.org>

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 06:50:19PM +0000, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 18:34 +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > Looking at the git log for arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm, most updates are
> > simply adding new descriptions, so a DTB from a year ago should work
> > just fine with mainline (modulo the Juno PCI window issue, which was a
> > DTB bug). Upgrading kernel shouldn't require a DTB upgrade to see
> > equivalent functionality.
> 
> But if you want the new functionality in the kernel, why should you be
> forced to wait for the bootloader to catch up (or do that work yourself)
> then upgrade to that new bootloader version??And what about the poor
> devs working on that new functionality, they're going to need to use not
> upstream device-trees. Then there's all the firmware and system
> configuration stuff that's in device-tree.

Developers working on low-level stuff will always need to be able to
override/upgrade/etc. I am certainly not arguing to remove those
capabilities.

The key point is that it is possible to provide a baseline DTB that is
good enough for most users, and will work with future kernels.

We're unlikely to get to a state where DTBs are perfect and complete
from day one. We can have something that remains usable.

Thanks,
Mark.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-12 12:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-10 12:58 [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH] arm: bootm: Boot kernel with U-Boot's FDT blob Michal Simek
2017-01-10 13:02 ` Alexander Graf
2017-01-10 13:05   ` Michal Simek
2017-01-10 13:08     ` Alexander Graf
2017-01-10 13:22       ` Michal Simek
2017-01-10 16:31   ` york sun
2017-01-10 16:35     ` Alexander Graf
2017-01-10 16:42       ` york sun
2017-01-10 17:10         ` Alexander Graf
2017-01-10 16:47       ` Ryan Harkin
2017-01-10 16:58         ` Alexander Graf
2017-01-10 17:17           ` Ryan Harkin
2017-01-10 18:34             ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-10 18:50               ` Jon Medhurst
2017-01-12 12:25                 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2017-01-12 13:47                   ` Ryan Harkin
2017-01-13 14:19                     ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-13 16:43                       ` Ryan Harkin
2017-01-10 17:52           ` Stephen Warren
2017-01-10 18:17             ` Michal Simek
2017-01-11  5:19 ` Lokesh Vutla
2017-01-11  7:20   ` Michal Simek
2017-01-11  9:39     ` Lokesh Vutla

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=20170112122540.GE10615@leverpostej \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /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