Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] of: overlays: New target methods

From	Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] of: overlays: New target methods
Date	2016-05-27 16:50 +0200
Message-ID	<rDrfj-4Hd-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<rzx9E-3hX-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rDaRc-30z-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Hi Frank,

> On May 27, 2016, at 00:15 , Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 5/16/2016 1:18 PM, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
>> This patchset implements two new target methods.
>> 
>> A target index method which allows selecting different
>> targets according to an argument using an extended API and
>> a target root method that fences the target only
>> to a specific given root.
>> 
>> Documentation and unit-tests are included.
> 
> I think you are attacking the problem the wrong way.
> 
> If I understand correctly, the problem statement is:
> 
>  In some cases, a devicetree overlay is meant to describe
>  a pluggable piece of hardware, which may be plugged into
>  various locations on a platform.  It should be possible
>  to apply a single devicetree to one or more locations
>  on a given platform.
> 
> If that is the case, then putting the locations where the
> overlay can be applied into the devicetree is not the
> approach that I would use.  It seems it would be better
> to specify the target location as a separate item from
> the overlay to the method that applies the devicetree.
> In that case, I would put the node(s) describing the
> pluggable hardware in the root node of the overlay
> devicetree (dtc expects a root node).  The apply
> method can easily find the node(s) and relocate them
> to the appropriate location in the platform's
> devicetree.
> 

It’s a bit more complicated. This was considered initially
but we ended up with the targets on the overlay.

It can work either way, but the problem with storing the
indirect targets in the base tree is that there is no
change in the bindings of the targets.

Putting things in the overlay seemed like it would have
no effect on the base tree whatsoever.


> -Frank
> 

Regards

— Pantelis

Thread

[PATCH v2 0/6]  of: overlays: New target methods Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-16 22:20 +0200
  [PATCH v2 1/6] of: overlay: Implement target index support Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-16 22:20 +0200
  [PATCH v2 4/6] of: overlay: Introduce target root capability. Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-16 22:20 +0200
  [PATCH v2 2/6] of: unittest: Add indirect overlay target test Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-16 22:20 +0200
  [PATCH v2 3/6] doc: dt: Document the indirect overlay method. Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-16 22:20 +0200
  [PATCH v2 5/6] of: unittest: Unit-tests for target root overlays. Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-16 22:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] of: unittest: Unit-tests for target root overlays. Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> - 2016-05-17 14:40 +0200
  [PATCH v2 6/6] doc: dt: Document the target root overlay method Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-16 22:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] doc: dt: Document the target root overlay method Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 15:00 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] doc: dt: Document the target root overlay method Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-17 18:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v2 0/6]  of: overlays: New target methods Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 23:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 0/6]  of: overlays: New target methods Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> - 2016-05-27 16:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 0/6]  of: overlays: New target methods Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 22:40 +0200

csiph-web