On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> The lack of shared soc data in device trees is indeed a problem that >> has been on my radar for a while now. Fortunately I do have a >> solution[1] which is partially implemented plus a contractual >> obligation to deliver it to a client in the near future. I fully >> expect this will become a non-issue between now and about mid >> November. >> >> g. >> >> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/devicetree-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg00680.html > > I haven't read through all of it, but it looks like your solution > affects only DTS files. I think Mark's concern is mostly with DTB > files, because we still need to have a unique DTB for every possible > board variation. > > Am I reading that correctly? You are; but the lack of dts factorization must be solved first before looking at whether or not .dtb overlays make sense. Otherwise we don't have a source for the factorized data. I personally don't think .dtb overlays are needed, but I'm not closed to the idea either. g. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
