On 07/04/2013 10:56 AM, Daniel Mack wrote:
...
> The built-in support for attaching a DTB to the zImage does not suffice
> here, because we have one image for all models, and also, we couldn't do
> a 'per-board-revision' selection that way either.
...
> As a solution, I'm thinking of a small framew
Hi Arnd,
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 04 July 2013, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 06:56:24PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
>>
>> > Unless I missed some recent discussion, this case is not easy to handle.
>> > Yes, I know that these kind of things s
Hi Arnd,
On 04.07.2013 23:34, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 04 July 2013, Mark Brown wrote:
>> Another way of skinning this would be for either the kernel to contain
>> a set of machine ID to compatible string mappings or for the device
>> trees for the boards to have an additional propertie
On Thursday 04 July 2013, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 06:56:24PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
>
> > Unless I missed some recent discussion, this case is not easy to handle.
> > Yes, I know that these kind of things should be handled by a
> > next-generation bootloader, but in our case
On Thu, 4 Jul 2013, Daniel Mack wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> On 04.07.2013 19:28, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Jul 2013, Daniel Mack wrote:
> >> I'm open to opinion and sugesstions :)
> >
> > What you describe above more or less fits the definition of what I
> > called the "impedance matcher"
Hi Nicolas,
On 04.07.2013 19:28, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2013, Daniel Mack wrote:
>> I'm open to opinion and sugesstions :)
>
> What you describe above more or less fits the definition of what I
> called the "impedance matcher". However it doesn't need to be part of
> the kernel a
On Thu, 4 Jul 2013, Daniel Mack wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm facing a problem with a transition from legacy board-file driven ARM
> machines to DTB, and I'm under the impression that a solution for it
> could be of broader interest.
>
> In short, devices that have been deployed in quantities come in thr
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 06:56:24PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
> Unless I missed some recent discussion, this case is not easy to handle.
> Yes, I know that these kind of things should be handled by a
> next-generation bootloader, but in our case, we want to avoid a loader
> update of already shippe
