Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750993AbXAKRjv (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:39:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751002AbXAKRju (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:39:50 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.170]:44403 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750981AbXAKRjt (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:39:49 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=eH7vMQZKq08Nq6Quuufbi+PtN/0EetNdtHB9dG9tTzkB8nKe6iuF25mBfFCz6dLDy8PWqo6oXWZGweHGva7iVVg/r5G0ON28lj0Lf0/nMEV22ZxFJ0y9+0F3j/TNmDM0KybrCf/GMdNaoirpwqWrdqfw4WGvsnSmkCh3vjmBeyw= Message-ID: <13426df10701110939k21f7bb1dy38d2b34ca37a5a36@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:39:47 -0700 From: "ron minnich" To: "OLPC Developer's List" , "Linux Kernel ML" , "Mitch Bradley" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Open Firmware device tree virtual filesystem MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2193 Lines: 58 Mitch Bradley wrote: > Request for comments. Sorry to revive this thread, I just ran through the discussion. I'm about 50% in agreement with the idea. I'd like to put in my $.02 in favor of having a way to pass the OF device tree to the kernel, in much the same way we pass stuff like ACPI and PIRQ and MP tables now. I'd like to also put in my $.02 in OPPOSITION go doing this via callofw() or any bios callback mechanism. We have hoped, for some years now, to use the OF device tree as a way to pass information from (e.g.) LinuxBIOS to the kernel. It seemed like a solid and tested path. The various kernels understand the tree, especially non-linux kernels which LinuxBIOS boots. It's a simple format and well-designed, unlike ACPI. We have always though it was a very nice design. But any mechanism that depends on a callback to OFW is way too limiting. As soon as you put that callback in, you lock out - uBoot - LinuxBIOS - Bochs BIOS as used in Xen and other hypervisors and emulators - any path that uses kexec (since the first kernel probably shut down OF) - etherboot - GNUFI So, while the idea of the OF tree is very general, and IMHO very desirable, the idea of the callback is very specific to one firmware implementation on one CPU architecture on one platform -- the OLPC -- and is hence not desirable at all. An idea that is potentially applicable and usable on all BIOSes becomes usable on only one. OFW is open source now. I think it's time to reexamine the basic assumptions about the need for a callback, and see if something better can't be done. Also, as others mentioned, callback into any sort of firmware on SMP can and does get messy. I've seen this in practice on EFI-based machines. Otherwise, this is just too limited to be of any use to those of us doing more than just OFW. Mitch, is there some way to get OF device tree to the kernel without involving a callback? That would be quite nice. thanks ron - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/