ARM topic: Is DT on ARM the solution, or is there something better?

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 04:29:21PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 01:57:27PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

quoted

You'd need something class based like USB, there's such massive
variation in what the hardware is trying to do and the tradeoffs.  A big
issue is that especially with I2C many of the devices are primarily
analogue devices implemnted in larger processes where the cost of adding
additional digital logic can have a noticeable effect on the area and
hence cost of the silicon.

My comments were mostly regarding the interface controllers. Those which
generate the same bus transactions but need different drivers on every
SoC. I suspect that the same costs don't apply (or at least not to the
same extent) to SoCs.

Oh, right.  In that space I suspect you'd face apathy on the part of
vendors for switching away from their existing validated and deployed
IPs - probably the best shot would be a freely licensed reference
implementation that people could pick up if they wanted.  It's plausible
that some of the vendors might do so for SPI where there are a bunch of
chips that don't have DMA/FIFOs yet and so could possibly benefit from
performance and feature gains but without that sort of benefit it's hard
to see what would be persuasive for the vendors.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20131118/82c19a4f/attachment.sig>