Re: [PATCH 02/11] x86: Add device tree support

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca wrote: What is the boot sequence for the embedded x86 platforms?  Is there still a bootloader? There's no one embedded setup on any platform, but one of the few constants of embedded development is trying to eliminate

Re: [PATCH 03/15] x86/dtb: Add a device tree for CE4100

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 04:33:41PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: Cc: devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior bige...@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Dirk Brandewie dirk.brande...@gmail.com --- arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts | 212

Re: [PATCH 05/15] x86/dtb: add early parsing of APIC and IO APIC

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 04:33:43PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: The apic ioapic have to be added to system early because native_init_IRQ() requires it. In order to obtain the address of the ioapic the device tree has to be unflattened because of_address_to_resource() has to work.

Re: [PATCH 02/11] x86: Add device tree support

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca wrote: On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 02:49:07PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: The reason why you have multiple .o wrapper files is because the specific platform code is not simply passing the device tree but also adding

Re: [PATCH 02/11] x86: Add device tree support

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote: On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca wrote: What is the boot sequence for the embedded x86 platforms?  Is there still a bootloader? There's no one embedded setup on any platform, but one

Re: [PATCH 02/15] x86: Add device tree support

Hi Peter, Since this series is based on the tip tree, these should be merged via the same route. Aside from the comments below, I'm okay with patches 1 2 going in for 2.6.38 (assuming NO_IRQ is fixed). I've picked up patch 12 since it is a generic fix. I haven't made a decision on the

Re: [PATCH] of/fdt: add kernel command line option for dtb_compat string

On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 01:50:47PM -0800, Stephen Neuendorffer wrote: -Original Message- From: Dirk Brandewie [mailto:dirk.brande...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:03 AM To: Stephen Neuendorffer Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; Randy Dunlap;

Re: [PATCH] of/fdt: add kernel command line option for dtb_compat string

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 12:04:56PM -0800, Dirk Brandewie wrote: On 12/06/2010 09:54 AM, dirk.brande...@gmail.com wrote: From: Dirk Brandewiedirk.brande...@gmail.com Adds a kernel command line option dtb_compat=string. This string will be used to select the first compatible device tree blob

Re: [sodaville] [PATCH 02/11] x86: Add device tree support

On 12/30/2010 12:26 AM, Grant Likely wrote: Since Linux on x86 has pretty much always depended on a two stage boot (firmware boots a bootloader like grub which in turn boots the kernel), then what is the use case for pursuing an in-kernel dtb linkage? simpleimage was used on powerpc for the

Re: [PATCH 3/5] of/device: Make of_get_next_child() check status properties

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 09:40:55AM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 10:35 -0800, Hollis Blanchard wrote: On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 7:09 PM, David Gibson da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au wrote: On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 12:33:22PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: On Wed,

Re: [PATCH 2/5] of/device: make for_each_node* check status properties

On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 11:29:57AM -0800, Deepak Saxena wrote: Some early device drivers don't actually implement a struct of_platform_driver, and instead use the for_each_node* iterators to search for matching device nodes. Disabled device nodes will no longer be returned by these iterators.