Re: [PATCH 5/8] of/overlay: Introduce DT overlay support

[Paul Bolle]

On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 15:18 +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 01:35 +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
> >> From: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> Overlays are a method to dynamically modify part of the kernel's
> >> device tree with dynamically loaded data. Add the core functionality to
> >> parse, apply and remove an overlay changeset. The core functionality
> >> takes care of managing the overlay data format and performing the add
> >> and remove. Drivers are expected to use the overlay functionality to
> >> support custom expansion busses commonly found on consumer development
> >> boards like the BeagleBone or Raspberry Pi.
> >>
> >> The overlay code uses CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC changesets to perform the low
> >> level work of modifying the devicetree.
> >>
> >> Documentation about internal and APIs is provided in
> >>       Documentation/devicetree/overlay-notes.txt
> >>
> >> v2:
> >> - Switch from __of_node_alloc() to __of_node_dup()
> >> - Documentation fixups
> >> - Remove 2-pass processing of properties
> >> - Remove separate ov_lock; just use the DT mutex.
> >> v1:
> >> - Drop delete capability using '-' prefix. The '-' prefixed names
> >> are valid properties and nodes and there is no need for it just yet.
> >> - Do not update special properties - name & phandle ones.
> >> - Change order of node attachment, so that the special property update
> >> works.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Now commit 7518b5890d8a ("of/overlay: Introduce DT overlay support"),
> > included in today's linux-next (next-20141126).
> 
> Yes, I pushed it out yesterday. Beyond merely stating a fact, I don't
> understand what you're trying to point out here. Is this commit
> causing a problem?

Yes, the issue I pointed out in my next remark.

And I add a boring line like that to my messages to make sure its
readers (which could be me, in case nothing happens within a week or
two) have all the facts at hand when handling them. It spares them the
trouble to look up these facts themselves.

Perhaps this lines was ambiguous. Should I rephrase it? Please note that
I usually use proper sentences. This one was a bit blunt. 

> >>[...]
> >> diff --git a/drivers/of/Kconfig b/drivers/of/Kconfig
> >> index fbe8f8d418f7..18b2e2539f84 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/of/Kconfig
> >> +++ b/drivers/of/Kconfig
> >> @@ -84,4 +84,11 @@ config OF_RESERVED_MEM
> >>  config OF_RESOLVE
> >>       bool
> >>
> >> +config OF_OVERLAY
> >> +     bool
> >> +     depends on OF
> >> +     select OF_DYNAMIC
> >> +     select OF_DEVICE
> >
> > There's currently no Kconfig symbol OF_DEVICE. So this select is now a
> > nop. Will that symbol be added in a future patch?
> 
> That's a hanger-on from an earlier version of the patch. I'll apply a
> fixup patch to remove it.

I've seen your fixup already. It turns out OF_DEVICE is a symbol that
was removed in v3.11.

Thanks!


Paul Bolle

--
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/