On 12.02.2008 01:14, ron minnich wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2008 4:00 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> I like the new structure, but there is one thing that irritates me to no
>> end: "@"
>> When I first read the dts without the accompanying discussion, I
>> completely misunderstood the structure because of the "@". I thought the
>> "@" really meant "at" in the sense that it refers to the address of the
>> parent entity, e.g "[EMAIL PROTECTED],0" means "the pci device at bus 0,0".
>> However,
>> the true meaning/translation of "@" seems to be "device with
>> address/number", e.g. "[EMAIL PROTECTED],0" means "pci device with address
>> 0,0".
>> Can we please have another separator like "-" or ":" or "_"? All of
>> those alternative separators convey the meaning better.
>>
>>
>
> I actually like @. It's part of the standard. Anyone else care to comment
> here?
>
Could you write something about the standard and our syntax in the v3
design document? That way, the knowledge will not be lost.
> Here is the latest: enabled is assumed, and 'disabled' will disable it.
>
> ron
> /{
> mainboard-vendor = "Emulation";
> mainboard-name = "QEMU x86";
> enabled;
> constructor = "qemuvga_constructors";
> cpus {};
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> /config/("northbridge/intel/i440bxemulation/dts");
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> [EMAIL PROTECTED],0 {
> };
> [EMAIL PROTECTED],0 {
> /config/("southbridge/intel/i82371eb/dts");
> };
> };
> };
> };
>
Very nice. The structure is pretty clean and short.
Regards,
Carl-Daniel
--
http://www.hailfinger.org/
--
coreboot mailing list
coreboot@coreboot.org
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
