Re: [PATCH 1/6] arm64: Unconditionally call unflatten_device_tree()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Mark,

On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 4:23 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 03:13:42PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 12:51 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@armcom> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 12:07:44PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > > Call this function unconditionally so that we can populate an empty DTB
> > > > on platforms that don't boot with a firmware provided or builtin DTB.
> > > > There's no harm in calling unflatten_device_tree() unconditionally.
> > >
> > > For better or worse, that's not true: there are systems the provide both a DTB
> > > *and* ACPI tables, and we must not consume both at the same time as those can
> > > clash and cause all sorts of problems. In addition, we don't want people being
> > > "clever" and describing disparate portions of their system in ACPI and DT.
> >
> > We'd get to the latter anyway, when plugging in a USB device where the
> > circuitry on/behind the USB device is described in DT.
>
> I don't understand what you mean there; where is the DT description of the USB
> device coming from if the DTB hasn't been unflattened?

Either stored in (FLASH) ROM on the USB device, or loaded from
/lib/firmware/.  In both cases that would be handled by the USB driver
for the device.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68korg

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds