On Tuesday 01 May 2012, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Well, there is no reason to rush this at all, it could live in parallel > > for a couple of years. But at one point we can decide that if nobody has > > bothered to write the .dts file for one board and tested it that nobody > > cares about that board any more and it can just get removed and possibly > > added back in dts form when someone does complain. > > Probably a FAQ, but maybe somebody can point me in the right > direction. How will Debian, Ubuntu, etc, deal with old machines who's > u-boot does not support DT, yet the kernel has moved on and only has > DT support for a board? Will the kernel install process need to > determine what board the machine is and append the DT to the end of > the kernel?
I think that is the most likely scenario. Another option would be to provide a replacement or second-stage boot loader that actually understands DT and that gets loaded instead of the kernel by the first-stage boot loader. > Or do we envisage a process where all DT are appended to > the kernel, and the machine ID, as passed by the old uboot, is used to > pick the correct DT? This has been discussed in the past, but IIRC we decided against putting that logic into the kernel. Folks on [email protected] might remember the details better than me. Arnd _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
