Re: GPIO - marking individual pins (not) available in device tree

On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 12:54:15PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:

Matt Sealey wrote:

quoted

Scott Wood wrote:

quoted

It's deprecated *in the context of flat device trees*.  Anything not  
using flat device trees is out-of-scope with respect to ePAPR.

Isn't the beauty of a device tree that every firmware no matter what
type can present it in whatever form it chooses, but still be describing
the same hardware in the same way?

When run-time services are not involved, yes.  device_type was used by  
1275 in the context of run-time services, which we don't have, so we  
didn't copy that property over (except for memory and cpu, to avoid  
gratuitous divergence).

quoted

I'm curious, is it the remit of the ePAPR TSC to publish and act as
a registration authority for device tree bindings for specific SoCs
or is that devolved to the SoC maker itself (be they a member of
Power.org or not) and, more prudent, two other questions; where are
Freescale and IBM publishing these if it is their responsibility,
are things like the mysterious i2c binding going to be published
under this TSC?

There has been talk about setting up such a repository, but I'm not sure  
what the status of it is.

Progressing intermittently when people get small packets of time to
actually do something about it.  We do really want this, it's just
no-one's yet had the spare cycles to make it happen.

At the moment things are published in the kernel documentation
(booting-without-of.txt, although I think it's now been split up into
multiple files), which is far from ideal, but better than nothing.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson