On Feb 12, 2007, at 6:46 PM, David Gibson wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 02:41:36PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: >> >> On Feb 12, 2007, at 2:23 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 14:16 -0600, Jon Loeliger wrote: >>>> So, like, the other day Benjamin Herrenschmidt mumbled: >>>>> >>>>> Note that there are still things that we might want to change. For >>>>> example, I think we really should look into adding a macro >>>>> mecanism >>>>> and/or an include mecanism to dtc so that we can do things like >>>>> #include >>>>> <ibm440gp.dtc> to get the base processor/SoC definition and then >>>>> "overlay" some properties on top of it (like emac phy mode etc...) >>>> >>>> What do people prefer here? Straight CPP pre-run? >>> >>> CPP pre-run has issue, notably due to the usage of "#" in property >>> names. >> >> You can get around that by invoking cpp with the right flags, I >> looked at doing this a while back and had it working. > > Umm.. which flags?
cpp -undef -P -x assembler-with-cpp >>>> Direct support built into dtc to do file-inclusion, macros? >>> >>> We aren't sure yet, though David might have ideas. >> >> Would be nice for simple math as well (addition, subtraction, bitwise >> ops, and shifts). For example was thinking that having some macro's >> around the PCI dev node's would make it a bit more readable to mere >> mortals. > > Yes. Adding an expression model would be more complex though. Is there somewhere we can grab one from? - k _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-embedded mailing list [email protected] https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
