[DTC PATCH] Add support for decimal, octal and binary based cell values.

[Kumar Gala]

On Feb 15, 2007, at 4:14 PM, David Gibson wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 12:41:50PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2007, at 11:49 AM, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: linuxppc-dev-bounces+b08248=freescale.com at ozlabs.org
>>>> [mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+b08248=freescale.com at ozlabs.org]
>>>> On Behalf Of Kumar Gala
>>> [snip]
>>>>> New syntax d#, b#, o# and h# allow for an explicit prefix
>>>>> on cell values to specify their base.  Eg: <d# 123>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jon Loeliger <jdl at freescale.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> What are people's thoughts on supporting '0x' and '0X' for hex?
>>>
>>> Are you saying allow d#1234, h#5678, and 0x5678?  Or use 0x instead
>>> of h#?
>>
>> I'm saying in addition to supporting the d#, h# notation.
>>
>> The reason I'm suggesting support '0x' is its pretty natural from C
>> and I know there have been a number of times when I forget that all
>> int constants in .dts are hex.
>
> I'd prefer not to do this.  I agree it would be nice in some ways, but
> I'm worried that if people see 0x all over the place, they'll assume
> that things without an 0x are decimal, which they can't be for
> compatibility.

People don't know what to assume, I know I've made a number of errors  
when I forget that all numbers where hex.

I think we should change dtc to follow standard C conventions and do  
it now rather than later.

We've already introduced dtc version compatibilities issues.  I agree  
with Dan that we should fix this now while there are a small handful  
of .dts in existence and we can provide a compat mode flag that  
treats non-prefixed numbers as hex instead of decimal.

(in theory with that we can use dtc to convert old .dts into new .dts)

- k