From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Schwarz?= Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:26:14 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] using a flat device tree to drive u-boot config In-Reply-To: References: <488E02C7.5000106@freescale.com> <488E053A.40205@freescale.com> Message-ID: <488ED426.2070502@matrix-vision.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Ben Warren schrieb: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Scott Wood wrote: >> Ben Warren wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Scott Wood >>> wrote: >>>> I find a device tree much easier to figure out than a tangled mess of >>>> header >>>> files, #defines, and #ifdefs... >>> In many ways, yes. But are you an average Joe or a Linux kernel >>> propellerhead? >> Is u-boot work normally done by average Joes, and does the average Joe >> really find the preprocessor mess more intuitive than a "propellerhead"? >> > You know what I mean. Some people like yourself do this for a living, > and are involved day-to-day in its specification. Of course it's > intuitive to you. For most people, getting U-boot going is one stage > in the development process of software for an embedded device. They > work on it for a few weeks or months, then on something completely > different. A few months or years later, they come back to it. You're absolutely right - just have a look at the vast lists of maintainers/contributors ... they are "average Joes" like myself. Realizing 2-3 projects each year should be possible without having to re-learn from scratch. >> While we're at it, let's re-write u-boot in Visual Basic. :-) > Uh, yeah. I like the idea of a central repo for hardware info, and > the device tree concept is good. My point is that the syntax, while > concise and exact, can be intimidating. Just look at the amount of > traffic on the mailing lists of people that don't understand what all > the fields mean when specifying IRQs etc. Anything we can do to make > it less so for noobies is a good thing for everybody. > Please keep in mind that WDenk is always watching if code is slowing things down or increasing size significantly. Improving things is very good - but not at the cost of size and/or speed. Configuring a board using a dtb usually needs far more code being present than needed. After all it's a bootloader and not another pseudo OS. But don't get me wrong ! The device tree is a very nice and usefuly thing ... for an OS. regards, Andr? > cheers, > Ben > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot-Users mailing list > U-Boot-Users at lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users MATRIX VISION GmbH, Talstra?e 16, DE-71570 Oppenweiler - Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 271090 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Gerhard Thullner, Werner Armingeon, Uwe Furtner