[PATCH 05/20] bootwrapper: flatdevtree fixes
Scott Wood
scottwood at freescale.com
Fri Aug 24 03:48:30 EST 2007
David Gibson wrote:
> Actually, no - sorry, that's the other problem with this, which I
> forgot to mention. On real OF, the "name" property contains the
> node's name *without the unit address*; that is, only the portion
> before the '@'. So your getprop change does not match real OF
> behaviour - and real OF behaviour will not do what you want for
> dt_get_path().
Ah, OK.
> Actually, in any case, I don't think we want to implement get_path()
> this way for real OF. Better to have get_path() itself as a callback:
> on real OF I believe we can directly ask for the full path to a given
> phandle, the get name based implementation can then be made specific
> to the flat device tree.
>
> Or actually, I think we might be able to come up with a get_path()
> implementation for flat tree that's less hideous than repeatedly
> calling get_parent() which is an ugly, ugly operation on the flat tree
It's likely to be ugly no matter what, though I'll try to come up with
something slightly nicer. If I were doing this code from scratch, I'd
probably liven the tree first and reflatten it to pass to the kernel.
> (and will get worse with libfdt).
Why is that?
>>Plus, something might come along that needs to dynamically look for
>>either name or something else. It's more flexible this way.
>
> Hrm... "something might come along" just seems contrived to me.
Well, I generally prefer doing things the more flexible way in the
absence of a good reason not to. OF returning the bare name is a good
reason not to.
-Scott
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list