RFC: Location for Device Tree Sources?
trini at kernel.crashing.org
Thu Aug 3 04:57:28 EST 2006
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 01:23:08PM -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 13:21, Tom Rini wrote:
> > Yes, as I said, I'm not totally sure we're at the stable point right
> > now, but I think that we are. I'll add that maybe we need to think
> > about API changes and DTS format versions. To quote from my post..
> > > > X bugs) or a change that requires a dts version bump.
> > Now it sounds like the IRQ thing was an "Oops, we should have changed
> > the dts version" and bailed, noting what is wrong with the dts.
> This confuses me. There hasn't been a change in the DTS
> format at all. I've even updated the 8641HPCN DTS file
> across the IRQ updates and all is fine. Same (DTS) format
> both before and after the IRQ changes.
> What have I missed here?
> The sandpoint (as far as I know) does not have a stable DTS. So in this
> case including the DTS in the kernel would reduce confusion. The same
> could be said for other boards where the DTS needed to be changed for
> the IRQ rework. The old DTS will no longer boot the new kernels. I'm not
> sure how much longer we will run into this problem though.
Now, if we've had to change the contents of the DTS because of a kernel
change, I'd say the DTS format changed as when I say format I mean not
only layout and naming, but what the contents are supposed to contain.
And, so it's clear, I don't know if we're at the very stable format
(names/layout/content means...), but when we are at that point, what
Matthew noted should, IMHO, be a graceful (ie explained in the panic()
or something) death.
And, so it's clear, I think (and hope!) we all agree on that last part,
once we hit stability.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev