On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Tom Rini <trini@xxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/08/2014 05:55 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Tom Rini <trini@xxxxxx> wrote: >> [...] >>> The problem I was raising at the ELC BoF is that today we can't just >>> stop overwriting values in the non-zero case as many boards lie about >>> their memory size, in non-zero ways, but no one noticed as they only >>> tested with U-Boot which was performing the fixup. >> >> So, should we conclude are we stuck being bug-compatible forever? >> >> I was hoping to add this logic to the kernel by [1], but of course >> this won't fly >> based on the argument you highlighted (as was pointed out by Uwe). >> >> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/7/28 > > Well, device tree should always win and once passed to the kernel, be > correct. If you have control of the kernel but not bootloader, like Uwe > says, drop the ATAG support. Yeah, that would be all nice and dandy, except for the bootloader passing device specific parameters on the command line. Maybe I can recreate enough of the data later on to actually go with that though... Regards, Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |