On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 10:24 -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
quoted text
> I'm not actually convinced that we *do* want to keep OFW resident in memory,
> especially given the memory tricks we need to play.  I also don't actually
> like the OFW interface that we.  The debugging aspect of it was a
> compelling argument up until a week ago (when kernel debuggers started
> finally finding their way into the kernel).

I don't actually think that the debugging aspect was _ever_ a compelling
argument. It might have made it theoretically possible for _Mitch_ to
debug kernel problems, should he be inclined to do so -- but for the
rest of us mere mortals it's just a PITA trying to keep OpenFirmware
live. A gdb stub is much more useful, in my experience.

quoted text
> However, until we clean up the promfs stuff, there's no chance of getting
> an OFW device tree upstream.

I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to create a 'flattened'
device-tree during early boot, like the PowerPC kernel does. And use it
thereafter, having quiesced OpenFirmware. Haven't we already been
working on unifying this between SPARC and PowerPC kernels?

I definitely don't think we need to play these tricks to keep
OpenFirmware resident while the kernel is running. Take a look at your
second patch -- it's _all_ just lookups in the device-tree, and you're
inventing a new way to do it instead of using the existing one.

-- 
dwmw2

--
unsubscribe notice
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/