Re: RFC: Location for Device Tree Sources?

On Aug 2, 2006, at 2:03 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:

On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 11:49 -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 12:21:37PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:

quoted

On 8/2/06, Mark A. Greer [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 09:20:52PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:

quoted

I have to second that opinion.  The device tree is absolutely  
integral
with the rest of the code/drivers needed to support a board.  I  
say
there are stronger arguments for keeping the dts files in the  
kernel
source than there are for the boot wrapper.

Well, the dts is no good to you without dtc so do we put dtc in the
kernel source tree too?

I don't know; should we include gcc also?

:p

Yep, my point.

I don't really have a problem with keeping known working dts files in
arch/powerpc/boot/dts.  Perhaps a 1-1 match with files in
arch/powerpc/configs?

I like that idea very much.  Actually that's what I thought were were
talking about in the first place.

quoted

It would still be nice to have the dtc source, attach tool source,  
and,
if useful, a more exhaustive collection of dts files in one place.

I also think that would be useful.

While useful, I doubt its likely to happen.  I forsee boards that  
aren't in the kernel tree having their dts live in their private  
worlds.  Also tools like mkimage that come from u-boot will probably  
still live with u-boot.

- kumar