On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Olof Johansson [off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

+arm-soc

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:07 AM, Ian Campbell [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 17:06 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:

quoted

Commit 9ccd608070b6 ("arm64: dts: add device tree for ARM SMM-A53x2 on
LogicTile Express 20MG") added a new dts file to arch/arm64 which
included "../../../../arm/boot/dts/vexpress-v2m-rs1.dtsi", i.e. a
.dtsi supplied by arch/arm.

Unfortunately this causes some issues for the split device tree
repository[0], since things get moved around there. In that context
the new .dts ends up at src/arm64/arm/vexpress-v2f-1xv7-ca53x2.dts
while the include is at src/arm/vexpress-v2m-rs1.dtsi.

Hi Grant,

Do you think there is any chance of getting this into 4.2-rc$NEXT or shall
we wait until 4.3? I'm assuming this should go via the DT tree, but maybe
it should go via an ARM tree?

I was assuming this would go thru the arm-soc tree which is why I
acked it. It is getting a bit late for 4.2 at this point, but I guess
the standalone tree remains broken for these platforms until this is
done. Probably not such a big deal in grand scheme of things.

I'm cc:d in the far tail of a thread, so I'll just comment here
instead of further up:

I'm not a fan at all of creating kernel/dts/<arch>/*, at least if
there's expected to be contents in there.

We don't have include/linux/asm-<arch>/ in the common tree either.
Let's not create that for dts.

I'd really like to move ALL dts files from arch/*. There's nothing
really tied to the architecture. They may happen to use some bindings
that only apply to an architecture, but fundamentally they don't
depend on the arch. Also, I'd like to be able to do "make all-dtbs"
and build every dtb in the tree.

That said, I'm not crazy enough to propose this re-org in the kernel
tree, but would like to do that if/when we moved dts files out of the
kernel.

So, while I'm all for a prefix-based sharing of DTSI files, I don't
want them to go in a common kernel/dts directory.

Besides sharing some snippets between arm and arm64, what else is
expected to need to go into such a shared location today?

Overlays. You easily have the same sharing of common boards. There are
also usecases of overlays on architectures that don't generally use DT
(x86).

We could also see sharing between PPC and ARM on FSL networking parts,
but I've not heard if they actually have that problem.

Rob