[RFC] [PATCH] Device Tree on ARM platform
Scott Wood
scottwood at freescale.com
Thu May 28 09:58:24 EST 2009
Robert Schwebel wrote:
> The oftree by design wants to be a complete hardware description. As you
> mention above, there are cases where you *nevertheless* need ad-hoc
> information about things *not* encoded into the device tree.
>
> This renders the whole concept ad absurdum. You need a machine number
> again - and if you need that: why not stay with the ARM model, define
> everything with platform data and avoid the whole thing?
Because it's better to have a little platform specific code than a lot
of it?
-Scott
More information about the devicetree-discuss
mailing list