Re: [PATCH] of/lib: Export fdt routines to modules

[Michael Bohan]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 04:20:09PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 10/18/2013 02:32 PM, Michael Bohan wrote:
> > My preference is probably straight libfdt calls, but if others
> > think that unpacking is a better solution, I'm able to go that
> > route as well. My only concern there is that we provide a means
> > to detect invalid dtb image (ex. handle error codes) and also
> > free the device_node allocations once the device is released.
> 
> I think we need to understand what you are putting in the DT first.

That's understandable. Please see my response to Mark.

> Given there are other desired uses like overlays which need to add the
> necessary loading and unflattening support, a common solution is likely
> more desirable.

But by convention, would overlays allow for 'application
specific' data, or are they expected to meet the more rigid
requirements of a real Device Tree?

Thanks,
Mike

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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/