RFC: Location for Device Tree Sources?

[Mark A. Greer]

On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 09:20:52PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> On 8/1/06, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org> wrote:
> >On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 17:35 -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote:
> >> On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 04:01:33PM -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 23:00 +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Mark A. Greer in his patch to port sandpoint to arch/powerpc put
> >> > > sandpoint.dts under arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sandpoint.dts
> >> >
> >> > I believe in his latest patches he removed this part. The device trees
> >> > were not included at all and he left this point open for discussion.
> >>
> >> That's correct.
> >>
> >> TBH, I think its wrong to keep them in the kernel source at all--yes,
> >> the same argument could be made for arch/powerpc/boot but that's been
> >> settled.
> >
> >Sorry, I have to disagree.  We're talking about device tree _source_
> >files here.  I believe they should be included in the kernel source.
> >Where that is, I don't have a particularly strong argument but they
> >should be included.
> 
> I have to second that opinion.  The device tree is absolutely integral
> with the rest of the code/drivers needed to support a board.  I say
> there are stronger arguments for keeping the dts files in the kernel
> source than there are for the boot wrapper.

Well, the dts is no good to you without dtc so do we put dtc in the
kernel source tree too?

> powerpc/boot/dts makes a lot of sense to me.

If it goes in the kernel src, I think that's the place as well.

Mark