Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/6] of: Allow scripts/dtc/libfdt to be used fromkernel code
From: David Daney
Date: Fri May 27 2011 - 12:49:49 EST
On 05/26/2011 08:24 PM, David Gibson wrote:
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 09:47:56AM -0700, David Daney wrote:
On 05/20/2011 11:33 PM, David Gibson wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 03:25:38PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
To use it you need to do this in your Kconfig:
select LIBFDT
And in the Makefile of the code using libfdt something like:
ccflags-y := -include linux/libfdt_env.h -I$(src)/../../../scripts/dtc/libfdt
Signed-off-by: David Daney<ddaney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/of/Kconfig | 3 +++
drivers/of/Makefile | 2 ++
drivers/of/libfdt/Makefile | 3 +++
drivers/of/libfdt/fdt.c | 2 ++
drivers/of/libfdt/fdt_ro.c | 2 ++
drivers/of/libfdt/fdt_wip.c | 2 ++
No fdt_sw.c or fdt_rw.c?
I had no immediate need for them. They could of course be added,
but that would potentially waste space.
Let's see if I can make it into an archive library.
That would be preferable. It's more or less designed to work that way
so that everything is available without using unnecessary space in the
binary.
Well, I was looking at this some more:
Grant specifically requested that this go in drivers/of/libfdt, however
I am fairly sure that building archive libraries there will require
changes to the upper level Makefile infrastructure.
If I go back to lib/libfdt, like my first version, I can easily achieve
archive library behavior, but then it is separated from from drivers/of.
Personally I am starting to like the lib/libfdt home more than
drivers/of. If Grant doesn't object, I think I will move it back there.
What do you think?
David Daney
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/