[PATCH 0/2] Character literal parsing
David Gibson
david at gibson.dropbear.id.au
Wed Jul 20 23:42:38 EST 2011
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 01:22:13PM -0700, Anton Staaf wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Brown <davidb at codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > Does this mean that the dtc inside the kernel is going to be the
> > required tool to use to build device trees? This change doesn't change
> > the DTB format, so it's as much of a concern, but was wondering if we're
> > intending to keep things compatible.
> >
>
> To be honest, I don't know enough to say either way. I am using the
> character literals in a device tree that is used to configure a
> single firmware image for multiple boards. That device tree is not
> currently passed on to the kernel.
>
> Your question makes me think that there are two device tree compilers that I
> should be paying attention to, is that the case? Or was it a more general
> comment about diverging from a historic syntax for device tree
> source files?
Oh, yes, forgot to mention that.
If you want to make extensions to dtc, you should do it to the
upstream dtc at git://git.jdl.com/software/dtc.git. The in-kernel
version is just a irregularly updated snapshot of that one.
--
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