On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Jaswinder Singh <jaswinder.si...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 3 April 2011 21:44, Andy Green <a...@warmcat.com> wrote: >> On 04/03/2011 05:05 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said: >> >>> Above everything else, I definitely like to see DT get done first, >>> it's essential for SoC these days. >> >> All I am suggesting is bind the DTs in the kernel. That's easier and faster >> than the alternatives and there is a lot less to go wrong and make DT a >> difficult experience for users. > > I second. > > Without doubt some mechanism to pass board configuration data > to the kernel is desirable .... recent issue of being able to pass smsc95xxs's > missing mac addr to kernel is one such use. Rather we just might be able to > do away with the EEPROMs for such purposes (?) > At the same time, Linux shouldn't depend on support from bootloaders > much more than is currently provided. > Otherwise what do we say... ARM Linux needs, say, U-Boot to run ? > And let us count upon neither the number of bootloaders in existence > nor the ease of making them support DT. > > So far Nicholas' idea of appending config data to kernel image sounds good > or may be a simplified version of DT that doesn't go deeper than board files.
John Bonesio has a patch that does exactly this. g. _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
