[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 14/16] tegra: dts: Add serial port details

[Jeroen Hofstee <jeroen@myspectrum.nl>]

Hello Tom, +Warner, +Julien Grall,

On 04-08-14 20:11, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:47:56AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 08/04/2014 04:43 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> On 1 August 2014 15:50, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>> ...
>>>> DT schemas/bindings MUST be identical between U-Boot, Linux, FreeBSD,
>>>> Barebox, ... (all of which use DT). As such, all the DT bindings MUST be
>>>> discussed on the devicetree mailing list.
>>>>
>>>> Since you're the author of the patch, it's your responsibility to have that
>>>> discussion.
>>> Are you referring to the linux,stdout-path discussion, or something
>>> more DT-generic?I suppose we could have a 'u-boot,console' for our
>>> part. But in any case you are talking about code and a convention that
>>> is already in mainline U-Boot.
>> I'm saying that any and all additions or changes to DT
>> schemas/bindings must be discussed on the devicetree mailing list,
>> not made/reviewed in isolation on only the U-Boot mailing list.
>>
>>> While I accept that we might change to
>>> something DT-generic if Linux points the way to something better, I
>>> don't want to stop using it just because Linux hasn't decided yet. The
>>> early console stuff and early debug UART stuff in Linux is not yet a
>>> shining example of perfection.
>> I strongly believe that if U-Boot continues to use DT, the current
>> DT usage in U-Boot needs to be actively moved in line with the
>> bindings that the Linux kernel, Barebox, FreeBSD, ... use. I'd
>> prefer this to happen even before U-Boot starts making additional
>> use of DT, so the conversion doesn't get forgotten. However, I
>> suppose it's a bit draconian to prevent further usage until the
>> existing usage is cleaned up, except where new usage introduces
>> additional dependencies on any current usage that's inconsistent
>> with the standard bindings.
> I don't disagree (and at ELC I was trying to see who, if anyone, had
> been reaching out to the FreeBSD folks since their DT files were very
> far from what Linux uses afaict for am33xx), but I'm also not seeing
> anything from non-Linux kernel folks on the devicetrees ML, or at least
> my quick search failed.

I am not actually following this topic, but FreeBSD folks do
try to support unmodified dft as far as possible afaik, see e.g. [1].

Regards,
Jeroen

[1] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/2014-March/007634.html