Re: iMX6 EOMA-68 CPU Card

[Bill Gatliff <bgat@billgatliff.com>]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
<lkcl@lkcl.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Lennart Sorensen
> <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
>  all that devicetree has done is move the problem, as well as add a
> runtime overhead to the execution of resource-critical devices.
>
>  not very clever, that.

Part of me regrets being as positive about DT as I was on LAK back
when the decision was made.  But I had just come off of a PowerPC
project, and it worked pretty well there and so I figured, "why not?".

I do think that DT is a good idea, and the runtime overhead is a
manageable problem.  But it's a good idea because it creates the
opportunity for post-compile-time flexibility, which CAN make some
board files go away.  Not nearly as many as some of us thought they
would however, and not without effort.

A related problem is that about 80% of what goes on in most ARM board
files should be done as module_init(), not board_init().  If we were
to be more vigilant about that, then DT would have more chances to
improve things.

What were we talking about, again?  :-)


b.g.
-- 
Bill Gatliff
bgat@billgatliff.com