Hi David,
I remove some labels from my generator. I created fake system with some
peripherals.
There are 3 buses and 3 bridges.
Can you check it and tell me what is wrong?
Thanks,
Michal Simek
/ {
model = mONStR;
chosen {
bootargs =
] Re: [microblaze-uclinux]
RE: [PATCH v3] Device tree bindings for Xilinx devices
In my opinion will be better generate only parameters which
you want not all.
That smells with unusable parameters.
In the long term, this may be true. In the short term:
1) dtb size is not the key
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 09:34:37AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
Hi David,
I remove some labels from my generator. I created fake system with some
peripherals.
There are 3 buses and 3 bridges.
Can you check it and tell me what is wrong?
Grant's comments all seem reasonable, apologies if I've
: [microblaze-uclinux] Re: [microblaze-uclinux] RE:
[PATCH v3] Device tree bindings for Xilinx devices
Hi Steve and all,
Here's a full .dts generated using an updated version of
gen_mhs_devtree.py, following the proposal.
It happens to be a microblaze system, but you get the idea.
I think
In my opinion will be better generate only parameters which
you want not all.
That smells with unusable parameters.
In the long term, this may be true. In the short term:
1) dtb size is not the key problem
Yes of course
2) making sure that everything works is a key problem.
3) The code that
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 06:07:56AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
In my opinion will be better generate only parameters which
you want not all.
That smells with unusable parameters.
In the long term, this may be true. In the short term:
1) dtb size is not the key problem
Yes of course
2)
