[U-Boot] [RFC 1/3] FDT: Add fixup support of multiple banks of memory

[John Rigby]

Kumar, Grant:

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely at secretlab.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 5:36 PM, John Rigby <jcrigby at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Kumar Gala <galak at kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>>>

....

>>>
>>> The problem w/libfdt is that use of 'offsets' to get to nodes can be problematic if the offset changes while manipulating it.  There are ways around thus but a number of functions we do would benefit from a more live tree.
>
> This is actually a really good point.  Offsets changing under your
> feet is just asking for bugs.  I could see this as being a legitimate
> justification for having a live tree model in libfdt and the ability
> to transition between the live and flat representations.  I was
> against this when we chatted on IRC the other day as it sounds like
> overkill, but this is a legitimate concern.  dtc has a live tree
> representation that could probably be migrated into libfdt.
>

I don't think I fully understood Kumar's question when he first sent
it.  Now I want to understand.  Are these gotcha's and workaround's
with libfdt documented anywhere?  If not then I would be willing to
write up something.  But I'll need some pointers to get me started.
In the longer term how much work do you think it would be to make
libfdt's internal representation dynamic?  I would be willing spend
some time on this if the consensus is that it is worth having.

Thanks,
John