Re: Request review of device tree documentation
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: 2010-06-14 06:09:32
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-devicetree
On Sun, 2010-06-13 at 23:13 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
quoted
We use that to suck the device-tree, which we flatten, and thenre-enterquoted
the kernel with the "common" entry interface.I don't think I want to do the same on ARM. I'd rather have the prom_init stuff in a boot wrapper, or have OFW itself generate the flat representation before booting the kernel.
But then it's no longer OF. IE. A compliant OF implementation provides a client interface API :-) This is going to be especially important if Mitch wants to keep OF alive. I suppose it could be done via a wrapper like prom_init, which flattens the tree, and sticks somewhere in a property the address of the OF client interface callback though it's a tad awkward. If well defined, I suppose Mitch might even be able to make his OF natively boot kernels that way but that's of course up to him.
I'm trying to constrain the number of things that could go wrong by defining only one way for getting the device tree data into the kernel.
I understand, and the flattened method is the most versatile, I'm just pointing out the situation here :-)
Right. We don't need to use OFW/RTAS to handle this use case.
Definitely not. It will depend on whatever hypervisor interface is implemented in a given environment. Though I do like the idea of passing precompiled bits of .dtb around for hotplug :-) We could make that a standard way of KVM to do things in embedded space. Cheers, Ben.