On 11/28/2015 9:34 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Sat, 28 Nov 2015, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 06:28:50PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: >>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> >>>> I don't mind creating the /proc/atags compatibility hack from the kernel >>>> for a DT based N700 kernel, as long as we limit it as much as we can >>>> to the machines that need it. Leaving a board file for the N700 in place >>>> that contains the procfs code (and not much more) seems reasonable >>>> here, as we are talking about a board specific hack and the whole point >>>> appears to be running unmodified user space. >>>> >>>> Regarding how to get the data into the kernel in the first place, my >>>> preferred choice would still be to have an intermediate bootloader >>>> such as pxa-impedance-matcher, but I won't complain if others are >>>> happy enough about putting it into the ATAGS compat code we already >>>> have, as long as it's limited to the boards we know need it. >>> >>> Assuming you have a N700 board file for special procfs code, then why >>> not getting at the atags in memory where the bootloader has put them >>> directly from that same board file? This way it'll really be limited to >>> the board we know needs it and the special exception will be contained >>> to that one file. Amongst the machine specific hooks, there is one that >>> gets invoked early during boot before those atags are overwritten. >> >> I've already suggested that. > > Good. And Arnd likes the idea too. So we might be converging at last > which is a good thing. It makes me happy too. -Frank -- 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
