Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:46:03 +0200 From: Rafal Jaworowski <raj@semihalf.com> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: powerpc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Device trees Message-ID: <4888798B.2050903@semihalf.com> In-Reply-To: <20080723.213817.1661913390.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20080723.164741.163264646.imp@bsdimp.com> <D33D2388-8237-406D-8162-1DF9013277A2@jeamland.net> <20080723.213817.1661913390.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <106CEF8A-EA8A-48BC-BAF7-B9C112F58A92@mac.com> > Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> writes: > : No, it doesn't. > > Is there any reason it doesn't? Having looked at the dtc stuff, it > seems to have all the requirements of device enumeration that we > talked about at BSDcan... At the time FreeBSD/MPC85xx was developed the flattened device tree concept was only getting momentum on Linux, so it was very much fluctuating. But the main reason was it's quite a bit of work to put everything together and it wasn't a critical item for the port. FDT is more or less what we discussed in May, and I think it was mentioned as one of the possible ways to go. Please note however the FDT infrastructure is quite heavy and getting it right needs to account for the non-code dependencies and elements too: - adopting external (GPL) tools, or providing our own - working out DTS layouts, OF bindings definitions and conventions (and their further maintenance) so that they can be used on architectures other that PowerPC (as having a modern device resources representation accross different architectures in FreeBSD was very important aspect of our discussions) Rafal
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4888798B.2050903>