From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albert ARIBAUD Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 23:16:56 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v6 11/20] tegra: fdt: Add clock bindings for Tegra2 Seaboard In-Reply-To: References: <1330375973-10681-1-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> <1330375973-10681-12-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> <4F4C11E9.1050907@nvidia.com> <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF17BDDF1D6A@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF17BDDF1DB0@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF17BDDF1DB8@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> Message-ID: <4F4D5258.7020901@aribaud.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Le 28/02/2012 19:46, Simon Glass a ?crit : > Hi Stephen, > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: >> Simon Glass wrote at Tuesday, February 28, 2012 11:37 AM: >>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>> Simon Glass wrote at Tuesday, February 28, 2012 10:38 AM: >>>> ... >>>>> I am going to add your binding, less the #clock-cells which U-Boot >>>>> currently can't support because it conflicts with the C preprocessor >>>>> (at some point I may look at a patch to use sed or some other means of >>>>> avoiding this). >>>> >>>> Out of curiosity, why does the C preprocessor come into it? Is U-Boot's >>>> build process running cpp on the .dts files or something? That's non- >>>> standard, although perhaps it could be a useful standard... >>> >>> Yes, but at the moment we only use it for '/include/ ARCH_CPU_DTS'. >> >> Uggh. That's going to make the device tree files look different between >> the kernel and U-Boot:-( With # disallowed in particular, it's going to >> prevent U-Boot from /ever/ using the correct protocols for parsing the >> device tree. This seems like an extremely bad idea. > > Until we change it in U-Boot, you mean. We could move to sed or pre- > and post-process the file to remove and re-insert the #. Rather, to convert # signs into something that the DTS cannot contain and the compiler can withstand (and it should be printable ASCII, too). is '##' a good candidate? If so, a forward conversion would e.g. map '/include/' to '#include' and any '#' to '##', and the reverse conversion would turn all '##' to '#'. But something that simple is bound to be wrong in some way... Amicalement, -- Albert.