On 10/01/25 09:56, David Gibson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 10:47:19AM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
Hi Ayush,
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 13:58:04 +0530
Ayush Singh <ayush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
I will experiment with adding support to dtc and see how things look.
Hopefully, 2025 is the year of addon board support.
Also one point different between fdtoverlay an runtime loading is
that runtime loading allows to set the target node of the overlay
at runtime.
I'm not really sure what you mean by "runtime loading". Do you mean
the kernel's implementation of loading dtbo overlays?
While that is a different implementation from the one in fdtoverlay
(AIUI), they're both working from the same dtb format. As we
discovered attempting Ayush's proposal, it turns out that the dtbo
simply doesn't have the information we need to correctly path
substitutions; and it's not at all easy to add it.
Ahh, I think there is a misunderstanding. `export-symbols` only seems to
support phandles, not paths. So no resizing involved.
It's closer to the phandle support in `__symbols__`, just local in scope.
So, the problem of the encoding format needs to be solved regardless
of which implementation is actually processing the overlays.
So there is no problem with the encoding format.
The questions I have are more regarding weather `export-symbols` or
something close to it can be made part of spec instead of the custom
linux thing.
Ayush Singh
