[RFC PATCH V2 2/2] kbuild: dtbs_install: new make target

[Grant Likely]

On Wed, 20 Nov 2013 13:56:18 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 01:10:04PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Nov 2013 19:22:46 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 03:21:46PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:20:47AM -0500, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > > > > By "That" are you referring to extending the standard for compatible
> > > > > strings to the board level, or forcing consistent naming on the dts
> > > > > files?
> > > > 
> > > > A consistent file naming on both the dtb and dts files.
> > > 
> > > It's time to knock the idea of naming the DT blobs after the compatible
> > > string on its head as well.  That's really not going to work.  Just
> > > leave the filenames as is, and move the problem into userspace to solve.
> > > 
> > [...]
> > > 
> > > Just use the filenames we already have in the kernel tree.  Let userspace
> > > parse the DT blobs for the compatible strings - it can then provide the
> > > user with the choice of all and _also_ show that certain of DT blobs
> > > may be compatible with a range of boards as well.
> > 
> > Yes, the consistent filename format is a non-problem. The files that
> > exist already have names. Nothing else is going to use them. Done.
> 
> Grant, you have the wrong end of the stick.  This discussion is about
> what happens when files from
> 
> 	$(objtree)/arch/arm/boot/dts
> 
> get installed into
> 
> 	/lib/modules/$(kernelversion)/...
> 
> and their renaming from the filenames we already have in arch/arm/boot/dts
> to a filename generated from the compatible string.

Umm, I don't follow where we're having a disconnect. That is what I'm
talking about. I'm arguing that renaming the files with installing them
is a bad idea. Are you not arguing the same here?

g.