David Gibson wrote:
This, of course, is exactly why I *don't* recommend embedded platforms move to including the device tree in the flashed firmware. Keeping the device tree in the bootwrapper means that it *is* updated with the kernel and we don't have to mess around with as much backwards compatibility junk.
Pardon my language, but this is such bullshit. This isn't "including a device tree in flashed firmware", this is "having a real Open Firmware". We don't embed anything in there, it's procedurally generated on each boot. Our whole problem here is that we have a device tree which was fixed for production before the device tree specification was nailed down for the MPC5200B, and it's still in flux. We can't be expected to walk lock-step with a 3 month kernel development cycle and we certainly do not appreciate sidelining real firmware in favor of static device trees which need to be compiled *per board*. All the FDT does is move a lot of extra hardcoded values out of the kernel and into a just-as-annoying extra file you need to be wary of keeping up to date since the format and specification changes so much. We never had this much whining about Apple's device tree, people just implemented the workarounds.. -- Matt Sealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Genesi, Manager, Developer Relations _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
