Hey Tom,
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:13:45AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> Do we have a document yet talking about the best practices for how we
> would like a hardware vendor to ship, store and possibly update a device
> tree, on the hardware? "However they like" seems likely to invite
> problems down the line with everyone trying their own thing. Thanks!
Speaking from my experience with the Marvell SoCs and after market
installation of mainline code (bootloaders, kernel, etc), I can say what
I'd like to see, if that helps ;-)
1) individually upgradable (bootloader, dtb, config, kernel, etc)
- separate flash partitions for each
2) bootloader uses as well as passes off the dtb
- Good for scenarios where user wants to modify flash partitions,
he would only need to update the dtb.
- facilitates fixes after deployment since dtb not bound to
bootloader.
I'm sure there's more, but those jumped to mind when I read your
question.
thx,
Jason.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
