> How about right here: http://fdt.secretlab.ca/
>
> I've only just created the site. I'll fill in some documentation and
> structure in the next few days. Feel free to create an account and
> start adding stuff.
>
> We'll need to talk about how best to manage bindings and have some
> form of re
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 20:24 +0200, Rafal Jaworowski wrote:
> Grant,
> When choosing the best location for the bindings page please consider
> it uniform enough so that various OSes can use it as a reference. We
> are very much interested in bringing FDT support for embedded FreeBSD
> (arm, po
> > This is about the 3rd or 4th time this idea has come up over the past couple
> > of years. Maybe this time it will stick?
>
> There actually was one set up on power.org, for epapr bindings. I'm
> still digging around to try to relocate the address, though.
We need to double check that inde
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Stuart Yoder wrote:
>> Lets *not* do it on power.org. I'd like to see the bindings used by
>> more than just powerpc people, and power.org might become a bit of a
>> mental barrier for non-powerpc folks. kernel.org would be a good
>> host. So would ozlabs or inf
> Lets *not* do it on power.org. I'd like to see the bindings used by
> more than just powerpc people, and power.org might become a bit of a
> mental barrier for non-powerpc folks. kernel.org would be a good
> host. So would ozlabs or infradead. Or I'd be happy to maintain one
> on secretlab.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Benjamin
Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 16:36 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
>> The idea of a wiki as a registration authority is a good one, but I'm
>> not volunteering to maintain it :-)
>
> here goes my hope :-)
>
> Do we have wiki's we could use on po
In message: <955e48b80908281105q60c057e8pfc16213f17da9...@mail.gmail.com>
Stuart Yoder writes:
: > Lets *not* do it on power.org. I'd like to see the bindings used by
: > more than just powerpc people, and power.org might become a bit of a
: > mental barrier for non-powerpc folks. ke
On 2009-08-28, at 18:06, Grant Likely wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 6:16 AM, Stuart Yoder
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Benjamin
Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 16:36 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
The idea of a wiki as a registration authority is a good one, but
I'm
no
What about openfirmware.info? I don't know anything about Core
Systems who maintains that site though.
Stefan Reinauer is the main guy there. He has been very helpful in
hosting the Open Firmware source tree. I expect that he would be
willing to host the wiki, since he has been interest
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:21 PM, Benjamin
Herrenschmidt wrote:
> However, it's a bit nasty to mix strings and numbers (phandles) in a
> single property. It's possible, but would likely lead to the phandle not
> being aligned and tools such as lsprop to fail miserably to display
> those properties
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 6:16 AM, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Benjamin
> Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 16:36 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
>>> The idea of a wiki as a registration authority is a good one, but I'm
>>> not volunteering to maintain it :-)
>>
>>
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 06:58:37AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:43:08PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 16:36 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
> >> The idea of a wiki as a registration authority is a good one, but I'm
> >> not volunteering to maint
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:43:08PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 16:36 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
>> The idea of a wiki as a registration authority is a good one, but I'm
>> not volunteering to maintain it :-)
>
>here goes my hope :-)
>
>Do we have wiki's we could us
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 12:43 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 16:36 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
> > The idea of a wiki as a registration authority is a good one, but I'm
> > not volunteering to maintain it :-)
>
> here goes my hope :-)
>
> Do we have wiki's we could us
On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 16:36 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
> The idea of a wiki as a registration authority is a good one, but I'm
> not volunteering to maintain it :-)
here goes my hope :-)
Do we have wiki's we could use on power.org or should we aim for a
community place ? Anybody has suggestions
The idea of a wiki as a registration authority is a good one, but I'm
not volunteering to maintain it :-)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
> I agree in general. It has long been a convention of mine to follow the
> vendor's names as exactly as possible. But that often presents
> difficulties. Many of them have been touched on in our previous
> discussion but I'll list some here just to emphasize the problem we face:
>
> a) Inco
> One advantage of indices is that they avoid endless arguments about the
> exact name (and spelling) of things.
Right, though in that case, nobody gets to have to decide on the name,
it comes from the chip manufacturer pin naming or data sheet.
I agree in general. It has long bee
> Open Firmware often avoids indexed structures. Cases in point include
> the use of named properties instead of fixed structures and named
> methods instead of function pointer arrays. Open Firmware's use of
> arrays for reg properties seems like the right choice for that
> particular cas
On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 11:11 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
> I refrained from commenting as I didn't want to get involved in an
> endless argument about "goodness".
Oh well, I asked for it, didn't it ? :-)
> Indexed arrays are appropriate for some cases and names are better for
> others. Names a
On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 14:21 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> So here's a followup to my discussion about the clock API.
Really nobody has a comment here ? :-) Not even Mitch ?
I refrained from commenting as I didn't want to get involved in an
endless argument about "goodn
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Benjamin
Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 14:21 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> So here's a followup to my discussion about the clock API.
>
> Really nobody has a comment here ? :-) Not even Mitch ?
Been wanting too.. a little swamped with kids
On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 14:21 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> So here's a followup to my discussion about the clock API.
Really nobody has a comment here ? :-) Not even Mitch ?
Cheers,
Ben.
> I'm cooking up a patch that replace our current primitive implementation
> in arch/powerpc/kernel/c
23 matches
Mail list logo
