Hi Grant, >> Hi Steve and all, >> >Here's a full .dts generated using an updated version of >> >gen_mhs_devtree.py, following the proposal. >> >It happens to be a microblaze system, but you get the idea. >> >> I think that is no good idea generate dts with all information. >> Especially information about PVR - number 2 means - Full PVR and you can >> obtain information directly from PVR. It is waste of memory space. >> xilinx,pvr = <2>; >> >> In my opinion will be better generate only parameters which you want not all. >> That smells with unusable parameters. > >That is the hard part about crafting the dts; deciding which >parameters the OS is going to care about and which ones are >irrelevant. The goal is to sufficiently and uniquely describe the >board so that the OS can easily figure out what exactly what it needs >to do to drive the board, but not to try and describe every aspect >which it knows about. Anything that is pollable (ie. USB devices) >doesn't need to be in the tree. > >It's also important to remember that the device tree will *never* be >perfect. Eventually something will come up that the device tree >doesn't describe well(a bug/quirk, something described poorly, etc). >In this case, as long as the device tree is specific enough to >identify which version of the board it is running on; we can alwasy >add platform specific fixups for that unique system. >
yes, but I think that is the right time to specify which parameters are relevant. I will focus on in EDK renerator. Michal Simek _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
