Going from 2.2.12 to 2.2.17pre10

Adrian Cox apc at agelectronics.co.uk
Tue Jul 11 19:37:11 EST 2000


Matt Porter wrote:
> Back to original point, I'm not against using a residual data or
> device tree if it doesn't have to have dozens of fixups applied.
> I just don't see that coming out of the proprietary hardware/software
> houses to use their broken data...

Residual data is useful for things like finding the memory size, and for
chips designed inside Apple. For almost everything else Linux already
contains a device tree, built by PCI probing when the kernel boots^*. I
don't see much need for a parallel, architecture specific, device tree.

- Adrian Cox, AG Electronics
*) Apologies to MCA and Nubus users.

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/





More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list