On Mon, 23 May 2016 18:59:31 +0200, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 09:16:09PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > > > How about allowing to embed eBPF bytecode in the DT that can be installed as > > a constraint set? This would allow maximum for flexibility and also make the > > implementation a lot easier. > > That seems somewhat Linux specific, I'd like to see some DT maintainer > buy in on that one as well as Takashi's thoughts. Using eBPF is a good idea for our purposes, but I understand Mark's concern, too. That said, I'm in favor of eBPF as long as DT people don't mind. We'd need some tools but the rest would be easier (less patching) once after it's done. thanks, Takashi -- 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
