You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to commits@nuttx.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2020/05/17 15:57:53 UTC

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] v01d edited a comment on issue #1020: [RFC] Using devicetree (DTS) to improve board support

v01d edited a comment on issue #1020:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/issues/1020#issuecomment-629819788


   > @v01d - given the size range, of the MCUs and the deeply embedded use cases for nuttx , I think the static compiled approach makes sense.
   
   You mean versus loading the DTB as with Linux as opposed to generating code from it? Yes, I think it is much more reasonable. 
   
   > 
   > What I can not stand about DT is the abstraction and nesting to get to a clear understanding of all the options for a driver. We should avoid that it we can, by using consistent naming and parameter sets.
   
   Devicetrees are really standardized, the problem is finding good enough documentation. I don't think this would be a problem if documentation on devicetree usage specifically for NuttX is created.
   


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org