On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 02:26:32PM +1000, David Gibson wrote: > Does anyone on this list have contacts with the makers of this board? > > Its firmware apparently provides a flattened device tree to the OS. > And while this step towards world domination is flattering, it's an > example of what I feared when people first got enthusiastic about the > idea of including flattened device trees in firmwares. The tree has > not, AFAIK, been past this list, and has apparently not been reviewed > by someone knowledgeable about device trees. In short, it's crap, and > now that it's embedded in the firware we can't really fix it. > > So, to any embedded hardware/firmware vendors doing Linux ports out > there. I certainly encourage you to use flattened device trees, but > can I please suggest you put the blob into your kernel image (in the > bootwrapper strictly speaking), rather than into the flashed firmware. > It's a lot easier to fix mistakes that way. > > There are situations where it's nice to have the device tree in > firmware, but there are many others where it buys little to nothing. > People seem to be a bit overenthusaistic on the concept at the moment.
Total Ack! Allow me second that opinion. g. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
