[SNIP]
Wolgang, thanks for bearing with me for so long. If you
still think
CFG_OF_TREE(or some variation there of) is inappropriate
for u-boot
I will accept that and move on.
Thanks. I still would appreciate some independent comments
- maybe I
just fail to see the full scope of this.
Me too, lets see if any of the OF tree experts has anything to add.
Regards Jocke
Just wanted to add something. I think most OF tree users see the DTB as something static, install once and you are done. I don't see it that way. The syntax of the OF tree is still evolving and I see updates to existing devices go into the kernel. Backwards compatibility is usually kept but you can't update to the new syntax if you want the option to downgrade. The type of CPUs I work with(mpc8xx and mpc83xx) has a lot of devices in them and I just use a few but as time goes I add one or two devices since I need them. Trying to add in all conceivable devices from the beginning won't work either as some of them might not have a syntax yet or is evolving. When downgrading to an older version I don't really want to the old boot/kernel use the new OF tree as there is no way to know if something will go wrong without testing that combination first. This adds a lot of extra work for the verification team and some extra work for myself.
Basically the DTB follows the with the release and if I downgrade I want the DTB to follow suit too. This is why I want to keep the DTB in the u-boot image so I don't have to mange yet another image that buys us nothing.
Comments?
Jocke