On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 06:48:53AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Your approach would work I suppose.... though it's a bit ugly.
Speaking of uggly, I'm still wondering why this oftree stuff for powerpc
must be soooo complicated. If you come from the ARM-linux world like we
do, the whole powerpc BSP stuff looks like a completely overengineered
piece of code, introducing complexity where it isn't necessary. But it
may be that it's just me not knowing powerpc kernel requirements deeply
enough :)
For most of the devices on for example the MPC5200B and MPC8260 I would
just model them as platform devices; there could be a simple
oftree -> oftree-interpreter -> bunch of platform devices
mapping. Is there a reason why there is sooo much interaction of the
platform code with the oftree? We usually have the situation that, if
something goes wrong, you have to change
- the driver
- the platform code
- the oftree
and they often contain redundant information (like names of oftree
nodes, which change more often than some people's panties).
Robert
--
Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de
Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
Hannoversche Str. 2, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany
Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-9
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
