On 02/20/2015 10:38 AM, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > Hi Peter, > >> On Feb 20, 2015, at 17:24 , Peter Hurley <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 02/20/2015 10:02 AM, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: >>> Hi Peter, >>> >>>> On Feb 20, 2015, at 17:00 , Peter Hurley <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 02/20/2015 09:35 AM, Ludovic Desroches wrote: [...] >>>>> As you said, we can imagine many reasons to have a failure during the >>>>> production, having several DTB files will increase the risk. >>>> >>>> It's interesting that you don't see the added complexity of open-coding >>>> the i2c driver or mixing DTS fragments for different designs as increased risk >>>> (for us all). >>>> >>>> >>> >>> You don’t have to use it. >> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile >>> index 5d27dfd..02129e7 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile >>> @@ -259,6 +259,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_CRANEBOARD) += board-am3517crane.o >>> >>> obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SBC3530) += board-omap3stalker.o >>> >>> +# DT quirks >>> +ifneq ($(CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC),) >>> +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_AM33XX) += am33xx-dt-quirks.o >>> +endif >> >> Won't this automatically be included on my Black that supports DT overlays? >> > > Yes it will. It is a grand total of 498 lines of code, and the total size of > the code segment is about 2.2K. > > You do realize that you’re probably booting a multi-platform kernel on the > black right? Including things for all 2xxx/3xxx and 44xx platforms? > For instance: > >> ~/ti/kernels/linux-github.git $ wc -l arch/arm/mach-omap2/*44xx*.c >> 443 arch/arm/mach-omap2/clockdomains44xx_data.c >> 526 arch/arm/mach-omap2/cminst44xx.c >> 251 arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpuidle44xx.c >> 250 arch/arm/mach-omap2/dpll44xx.c >> 4864 arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c >> 295 arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm44xx.c >> 358 arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomains44xx_data.c >> 62 arch/arm/mach-omap2/prcm_mpu44xx.c >> 770 arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm44xx.c >> 210 arch/arm/mach-omap2/prminst44xx.c >> 117 arch/arm/mach-omap2/vc44xx_data.c >> 130 arch/arm/mach-omap2/voltagedomains44xx_data.c >> 104 arch/arm/mach-omap2/vp44xx_data.c >> 8380 total > > I bet those things are far larger than 2.2K. And I also bet that in the > tradeoff analysis that the board maintainer did things came down to > increasing complexity so that he can consolidate the kernels for all the > other platforms he has to support besides the black. Not that it really matters, but I'm not using any of that. >>> Some people really do though. As for increased risk >>> I expect to see arguments instead of a statement. >> >> No one is wasting your time with random arguments. Please keep your tone civil. >> > > A statement like 'increasing risk for all of us' is very open ended. What is > the risk? How much of it exists? My point was simply that this trades reduced complexity in one area with increased complexity in another area. For you, that trade-off is worth it, but for others, not so much. FWIW, I agree that some mechanism is required to support the other use cases. I just don't think ease of manufacturing, when the submit configuration is the BeagleBone, is where I would hang my hat. > If I offended you I’m really sorry though, I meant no such thing. In re-reading it, I realize I shouldn't have taken offense. Thanks anyway for the apology. Regards, Peter Hurley -- 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
