On Fri, Jun 24 2011, Anton Staaf wrote: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Does this mean that the dtc inside the kernel is going to be the > required tool to use to build device trees? This change doesn't change > the DTB format, so it's as much of a concern, but was wondering if we're > intending to keep things compatible. > > > To be honest, I don't know enough to say either way. I am using the character > literals in a device tree that is used to configure a single firmware image > for > multiple boards. That device tree is not currently passed on to the kernel. > > Your question makes me think that there are two device tree compilers that I > should be paying attention to, is that the case? Or was it a more general > comment about diverging from a historic syntax for device tree source files?
Both, really. There is a dtc at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/galak/dtc.git but it seems older than the one in the kernel. Also, the dts form is defined in the ePAPR documents, and this would be a (minor) divergence from that. David -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
