On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Pantelis Antoniou <panto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Assuming that we do work on a DT object format, and that the runtime resolution mechanism is approved, > then I agree that this part of the capebus patches can be dropped and the functionality assumed by generic > DT core. > > The question is that this will take time, with no guarantees that this would be acceptable from > the device tree maintainers. So I am putting them in the CC list, to see what they think about it. This is actually exactly the direction I want to go with DT, which the ability to load supplemental DT data blobs from either a kernel module or userspace using the firmware loading infrastructure. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
