[PATCH] powerpc/fsl: add device tree binding for QE firmware
Scott Wood
scottwood at freescale.com
Fri Mar 26 02:16:55 EST 2010
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> As far as I can see, you want that indirection node so that you
> safe space in the DTB.
Probably more of a general desire to not duplicate things that don't
need to be duplicated... I don't think the space issue is critical in
this particular case.
> With real OF it is trivial to not have
> multiple copies of the data if you want a few properties with
> the same data. There is no reason this could not be done in DTB
> as well (and some way in DTS to express that, or maybe the tools
> could auto-detect it, whatever).
You object to some slight complexity in the device binding, and want to
replace it with an incompatible, more complex change to the blob format?
>>> That is a good question. Why is it necessary to pass the blob via the
>>> tree?
>> Because sometimes the firmware is needed before networking or serial I/O
>> can function.
>
> Can't you link it into the kernel then? Seems a better place for
> it to me. Of course you said something about GPL, heh.
U-Boot needs it too.
-Scott
More information about the devicetree-discuss
mailing list