RE: purpose of /chosen node (was RE: [PATCH] powerpc: delete boot-cpu and chosen nodes from all DTSfiles)

=20

-----Original Message-----
From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak@kernel.crashing.org]=20
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 3:39 PM
To: Yoder Stuart-B08248
Cc: Segher Boessenkool; Benjamin Herrenschmidt;=20
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: purpose of /chosen node (was RE: [PATCH]=20
powerpc: delete boot-cpu and chosen nodes from all DTSfiles)
=20
=20
On Feb 15, 2007, at 3:26 PM, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:

quoted

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: linuxppc-dev-bounces+b08248=3Dfreescale.com@ozlabs.org
[mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+b08248=3Dfreescale.com@ozlabs.org]
On Behalf Of Segher Boessenkool
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 7:40 PM
To: David Gibson
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; Tabi Timur-B04825
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: delete boot-cpu and chosen
nodes from all DTSfiles

quoted

My point is that the interrupt-controller property in

/chosen *should*

quoted

be there, but it doesn't make a lot of sense for it to be=20

set by the

quoted

quoted

quoted

bootloader (because it's a fixed property of the board).

And that means it shouldn't be in /chosen at all.  It's not
just a fixed property of the board, it is a physical property
of the board.  It doesn't belong in /chosen.

I agree with Segher here.  The interrupt-controller property doesn't
belong in /chosen.

The 1275 OF spec says about /chosen:

   Has properties describing parameters chosen or specified at
   runtime.

=20
I want to reiterate something Paul mentioned, any similarity=20
that the =20
device tree has to 1275 is strictly coincidental.

I understand that point, but mixing the types of properties in
/chosen doesn't buy us anything.  We shouldn't be shackled by
the 1275 spec, but having nodes like /chosen with designated
purpose architecturally make sense.

/chosen shouldn't be a catch-all or a convenient place to stick
stuff.  I think in this case following 1275 is a good thing.

Stuart