On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Andrew Bresticker
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 1:57 PM, David Daney [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 08/22/2014 01:42 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:

quoted

On Aug 21, 2014 3:05 PM, "Andrew Bresticker" <abrestic@chromium.org
<mailto:abrestic@chromium.org>> wrote:
 >
 > To be consistent with other architectures and to avoid unnecessary
 > makefile duplication, move all MIPS device-trees to arch/mips/boot/dts
 > and build them with a common makefile.

I recall reading that the ARM organization for DTS files was a bit
unfortunate and should have been something like:

arch/arm/boot/dts/<vendor>/

Is this something we should do for the MIPS and update the other
architectures to follow that scheme?

If we choose not to intermingle .dts files from all the vendors in a single
directory, why do anything at all?  Currently the .dts files for a vendor
are nicely segregated with the rest of the vendors code under a single
directory.

Personally I think things are fine as they are.  Any common code remaining
in the Makefiles could be moved to the scripts directory for a smaller
change.

Assuming we don't move them to a common location just to segregate
them again, it makes MIPS consistent with every other architecture
(not just ARM!) using DT.  It also makes it easier to introduce common
changes later on, like the 'dtbs' or 'dtbs_install' make targets.

I think having dts files under a predictable location is a good idea,
especially if it allows common code/targets as "dtbs".

Maybe a totally insane idea, but how this for having the cake and eating it too:

arch/mips/boot/dts/*.dts => dts files to be built along side the kernel as .dtbs

arch/mips/<mach>/*.dts => dts files built into the kernel

(the ../*.dts isn't meant as they should be in the top directory, just
somewhere in that sub tree)

Because I can see a use case where you want both. For example octeon
uses generic device tree boards to use as a basis if the bootloader
did not provide one/is too old, but maybe also provide dts files for
known boards, which shouldn't be included in the kernel binary itself.

And I would like to do a similar thing when I want to convert bcm63xx
to device tree, i.e. have dts files for supported boards, but also
include a "standard"/"fall-back" dts for each of the supported SoCs to
load if there is no dtb passed and the old board registration code is
used.


Jonas