From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Hollis Blanchard <hollis_blanchard@mentor.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 10:30:25 -0800
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Honor /memory/reg node in DTB files
In-Reply-To: <20101207190936.EC285D0E429@gemini.denx.de>
References: <4CFD863A.7070000@mentor.com>
	<20101207065234.DC3BB280@gemini.denx.de>
	<4CFE775C.6050001@mentor.com>
	<20101207190936.EC285D0E429@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <4CFFCEC1.6000103@mentor.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 12/07/2010 11:09 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> There are many board vendors who shipt boards with different
> configurations - with or without NAND flash; with or without other
> peripherals like CAN contollers, LCD, etc.; with different LCD sizes
> and types, in portrait or landscape orientation, etc.  Some of these
> features can be determined by probing the hardware, others (like the
> orientation of a LCD) cannot.  It is sometimes a maintenance nightmare
> to provide tens of different configurations of U-Boot for a single
> product.  Being able to cinfigure available hardware through the DT,
> and using a single common binary image of U-Boot for such systems
> would be a great benefit.
That's fine, but so far I don't see how it's related. This is 
information u-boot needs during its own initialization, right?

We need a way for our tools to specify information to the kernels' 
initialization, and still want u-boot to do all the hardware 
configuration it does today. It really doesn't matter to us if in the 
future u-boot uses device trees for that configuration: we just need a 
way to interact with the kernels.

Hollis Blanchard
Mentor Graphics, Embedded Systems Division