Re: Invitation and RFC: Linux Plumbers Device Tree track proposed
So, like, Arnd Bergmann said: On Tuesday 14 April 2015 10:36:15 Rob Herring wrote: 4) Identifying additional people who should attend the device tree track. Arnd Bergmann Matt Porter Jon Loeliger Gaurav Minocha Sorry, I won't be there. I should have replied earlier, but I'll be on parental leave at the time. Arnd Arnd, OK. Hard to believe, but it looks like I have enough ducks in a row to attend Plumber's this year! Thanks, jdl -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-embedded in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Invitation and RFC: Linux Plumbers Device Tree track proposed
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 04:36:15PM +0100, Rob Herring wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Rowand, Frank frank.row...@sonymobile.com wrote: In recent years there have been proposed tools to aid in the creation of valid device trees and in debugging device tree issues. An example of this is the various approaches proposed (with source code provided) to validate device tree source against valid bindings. As of today, device tree related tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure have not progressed very far. I have submitted a device tree related proposal for the Linux Plumbers 2015 conference to spur action and innovation in such tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure. The current title of the track is Device Tree Tools, Validation, and Troubleshooting. The proposal is located at http://wiki.linuxplumbersconf.org/2015:device_tree_tools_validation_and_trouble_shooting I am looking for several things at the moment: 1) Suggestions of additional topics to be discussed. A few things on my list: - Supported and not supported overlay usecases I guess Kernel-driven overlay application (it's been called quirks elsewhere) would fall under this? It's rather scary, and would need fairly strict rules to be feasible and remain maintainable, which is going to limit where it can be used. I think the core guys for that are on the list already? - Standardizing Android dtb handling. Appended DTB for arm64? Not liked by upstream, but already in use. If people are going to package a kernel and DTB together, it would be nice if they could at least be easily decomposed (using something like FIT). So +1 for that discussion. 2) Emails or other messages expressing an interest in attending the device tree track. I'm interested. 3) Commitments to attend the device tree track (the conference committee is looking at attendee interest and commitments as part of the process of accepting the device tree track). If the DT track goes ahead, I'll be there. Mark. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-embedded in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Invitation and RFC: Linux Plumbers Device Tree track proposed
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Rowand, Frank frank.row...@sonymobile.com wrote: In recent years there have been proposed tools to aid in the creation of valid device trees and in debugging device tree issues. An example of this is the various approaches proposed (with source code provided) to validate device tree source against valid bindings. As of today, device tree related tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure have not progressed very far. I have submitted a device tree related proposal for the Linux Plumbers 2015 conference to spur action and innovation in such tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure. The current title of the track is Device Tree Tools, Validation, and Troubleshooting. The proposal is located at http://wiki.linuxplumbersconf.org/2015:device_tree_tools_validation_and_trouble_shooting I am looking for several things at the moment: 1) Suggestions of additional topics to be discussed. A few things on my list: - Supported and not supported overlay usecases - Tools for overlays - I think overlays has created new challenges in validation and a need for new tools. How to test an overlay applies? Generating a dtb from dts + overlay dts. Generating an overlay from a diff of old and new dts (overlay as a way to update old dtbs) - Shrinking the binding review fire hose. How to improve binding documentation structure and review. - Standardizing Android dtb handling. Appended DTB for arm64? Not liked by upstream, but already in use. 2) Emails or other messages expressing an interest in attending the device tree track. 3) Commitments to attend the device tree track (the conference committee is looking at attendee interest and commitments as part of the process of accepting the device tree track). I plan to attend. I'm probably attending some of the Android mini conf too, so I'll have to split my time. 4) Identifying additional people who should attend the device tree track. Arnd Bergmann Matt Porter Jon Loeliger Gaurav Minocha Rob The desired outcome of the device tree track is to encourage the future development of tools, process, etc to make device tree related development, test, review and system administration more efficient, faster, easier, more robust, and to improve troubleshooting and debugging facilities. Some examples of areas of interest could include: - make it easier to create correct device tree source files - support for debugging incorrect device tree source files - create a kernel that correctly boots one or more specific device trees (eg a kernel configured to include the proper drivers and subsystems) - create drivers that properly work for a device tree binding definition - create drivers that support detecting errors in the related node(s) in a device tree The wiki page lists additional areas of interest. Thanks, Frank Rowand Sony Mobile Communications -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe devicetree in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-embedded in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Invitation and RFC: Linux Plumbers Device Tree track proposed
On Tuesday 14 April 2015 10:36:15 Rob Herring wrote: 4) Identifying additional people who should attend the device tree track. Arnd Bergmann Matt Porter Jon Loeliger Gaurav Minocha Sorry, I won't be there. I should have replied earlier, but I'll be on parental leave at the time. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-embedded in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Invitation and RFC: Linux Plumbers Device Tree track proposed
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 09:20:33PM +0200, Rowand, Frank wrote: In recent years there have been proposed tools to aid in the creation of valid device trees and in debugging device tree issues. An example of this is the various approaches proposed (with source code provided) to validate device tree source against valid bindings. As of today, device tree related tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure have not progressed very far. I have submitted a device tree related proposal for the Linux Plumbers 2015 conference to spur action and innovation in such tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure. The current title of the track is Device Tree Tools, Validation, and Troubleshooting. The proposal is located at http://wiki.linuxplumbersconf.org/2015:device_tree_tools_validation_and_trouble_shooting I am looking for several things at the moment: 1) Suggestions of additional topics to be discussed. 2) Emails or other messages expressing an interest in attending the device tree track. 3) Commitments to attend the device tree track (the conference committee is looking at attendee interest and commitments as part of the process of accepting the device tree track). It happens that I'll be in Seattle at the time for the KVM Forum. It's my intention to attend the Plumbers' device tree track, except where it collides with things I need to attend at KVM Forum. -- David Gibson| I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson pgpHrTS3Rwd_v.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Celinux-dev] Invitation and RFC: Linux Plumbers Device Tree track proposed
Hi Rob,
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote:
Is there a device tree porting HOWTO anywhere? If I have a board
that's using explicit C initialization, and I want to convert it over
to device tree, step by step what do I do?
If I'm writing a new board support, what device tree bits do I need to
get a shell prompt on a serial port running out of initramfs?
(Physical memory, interrupt controller, timer to drive the scheduler,
serial chip...)
There's a bunch of device tree reference material out there, but no
tutorial material at all, that I can find...
http://www.devicetree.org/Device_Tree_Usage
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say programmer or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-embedded in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Invitation and RFC: Linux Plumbers Device Tree track proposed
In recent years there have been proposed tools to aid in the creation of valid device trees and in debugging device tree issues. An example of this is the various approaches proposed (with source code provided) to validate device tree source against valid bindings. As of today, device tree related tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure have not progressed very far. I have submitted a device tree related proposal for the Linux Plumbers 2015 conference to spur action and innovation in such tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure. The current title of the track is Device Tree Tools, Validation, and Troubleshooting. The proposal is located at http://wiki.linuxplumbersconf.org/2015:device_tree_tools_validation_and_trouble_shooting I am looking for several things at the moment: 1) Suggestions of additional topics to be discussed. 2) Emails or other messages expressing an interest in attending the device tree track. 3) Commitments to attend the device tree track (the conference committee is looking at attendee interest and commitments as part of the process of accepting the device tree track). 4) Identifying additional people who should attend the device tree track. The desired outcome of the device tree track is to encourage the future development of tools, process, etc to make device tree related development, test, review and system administration more efficient, faster, easier, more robust, and to improve troubleshooting and debugging facilities. Some examples of areas of interest could include: - make it easier to create correct device tree source files - support for debugging incorrect device tree source files - create a kernel that correctly boots one or more specific device trees (eg a kernel configured to include the proper drivers and subsystems) - create drivers that properly work for a device tree binding definition - create drivers that support detecting errors in the related node(s) in a device tree The wiki page lists additional areas of interest. Thanks, Frank Rowand Sony Mobile Communications -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-embedded in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [Celinux-dev] Invitation and RFC: Linux Plumbers Device Tree track proposed
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Rowand, Frank frank.row...@sonymobile.com wrote: In recent years there have been proposed tools to aid in the creation of valid device trees and in debugging device tree issues. An example of this is the various approaches proposed (with source code provided) to validate device tree source against valid bindings. As of today, device tree related tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure have not progressed very far. I have submitted a device tree related proposal for the Linux Plumbers 2015 conference to spur action and innovation in such tools, techniques, and debugging infrastructure. The current title of the track is Device Tree Tools, Validation, and Troubleshooting. The proposal is located at http://wiki.linuxplumbersconf.org/2015:device_tree_tools_validation_and_trouble_shooting I am looking for several things at the moment: 1) Suggestions of additional topics to be discussed. 2) Emails or other messages expressing an interest in attending the device tree track. 3) Commitments to attend the device tree track (the conference committee is looking at attendee interest and commitments as part of the process of accepting the device tree track). 4) Identifying additional people who should attend the device tree track. The desired outcome of the device tree track is to encourage the future development of tools, process, etc to make device tree related development, test, review and system administration more efficient, faster, easier, more robust, and to improve troubleshooting and debugging facilities. Some examples of areas of interest could include: - make it easier to create correct device tree source files - support for debugging incorrect device tree source files - create a kernel that correctly boots one or more specific device trees (eg a kernel configured to include the proper drivers and subsystems) - create drivers that properly work for a device tree binding definition - create drivers that support detecting errors in the related node(s) in a device tree The wiki page lists additional areas of interest. Is there a device tree porting HOWTO anywhere? If I have a board that's using explicit C initialization, and I want to convert it over to device tree, step by step what do I do? If I'm writing a new board support, what device tree bits do I need to get a shell prompt on a serial port running out of initramfs? (Physical memory, interrupt controller, timer to drive the scheduler, serial chip...) There's a bunch of device tree reference material out there, but no tutorial material at all, that I can find... Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-embedded in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
