[PATCH 8/9 V3] Add documentation for the new DTS language.
David Gibson
david at gibson.dropbear.id.au
Fri Oct 3 10:23:59 EST 2008
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:46:02PM -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 13:50 -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> > In message: <20081002152242.GB22258 at ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net>
> > Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com> writes:
> > : On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 11:18:00AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > : > > I vote against anything similar to the C preprocessor.
> > : >
> > : > Why?
> > :
> > : It's not nearly as powerful as the semantic approach, and it is
> > : syntactically clumsy (I do *not* want to have to put a backslash at the
> > : end of every line within a macro, for example).
> >
> > And there are no looping constructs at all in CPP. You flat out can't
> > do a generalized for loop with the macro language, for example. Its
> > symbols also do not map 1-1/onto symbols used by the dts files. It
> > can only grok macros you define for it, so it has no way of knowing
> > many useful things that dts just knows.
> >
> > Basically, it is using a hammer to pound screws in. Sure, it seems to
> > work, but the results are shoddy.
> >
> > Warner
>
> Also, it might be worth noting that if one uses "-I dts -O dts"
> with my patch set, it is pretty-darn similar behavior to a simple
> pre-processing pass that simply expands the original constructs
> into a flat DTS file like we have today.
Sorry, I don't see the relevance of this.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
More information about the devicetree-discuss
mailing list