On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:12 PM, David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote: > On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 05:09:27PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: >> In other words; having your bootloader support FDT is preferred, but >> not required. > > I wouldn't even go so far as to say it's preferred. IMO, people have > gone a bit prematurely keen on moving devtree handling into the > firmware. Putting it in the firmware has a number of advantages, but > it also has a number of non-trivial disadvantages.
I disagree. The more I work with it, the more I appreciate the advantage of decoupling the kernel image file from the hardware description. It is valuable being able to build a single image file that boots on a wide range of boards because the device tree passed in by firmware. I'm not downplaying the disadvantages and problems, but I still hold the view that the striving for generic multiplatform kernel images is worth the effort. ... but I do agree that hard linking the .dtb into firmware, or making the .dtb hard to upgrade is the way of madness. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
