Subject: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] ARM topic: Is DT on ARM the solution, or is there something better?

From: [email-masked] (Thierry Reding)
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:36:15 +0100

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 08:18:53AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07:16PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> [ ... ]
> > > 
> > > Was this just a matter of enabling OF on this platform, or do you have an
> > > out-of-tree set of patches ? If the latter, is it available somewhere
> > > to look at (including the complete devicetree from your above example) ?
> > 
> > It was mostly a matter of enabling OF and writing the device tree. Most
> > of the generic kernel code changes I even got merged, but there were a
> > few patches that I never got around to merge. Some weren't anywhere
> > close to a mergeable state either.
> > 
> > I no longer work for the company and don't have access to the patches.
> > But I can ping a few people and see if I can dig up something for you.
> > 
> That would be great.

Hi Guenter,

It took some time, but here's the tree:

	https://github.com/avionic-design/linux/commits/medatom/master

The device tree files are in arch/x86/boot/dts (as expected I guess). A
linux-next from over a year ago was used as the base for that branch, so
some of that will be stale, but DT is a stable ABI, so that should still
be valid. =)

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Although I have
not been working on that for a while, so my memories about it aren't all
that fresh anymore.

Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20131101/ab3c84f4/attachment.sig>