Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on May 7, 2015
The Device Tree has been used for many years on PowerPC, and propagated to several other architectures since then, most notably the ARM architecture. Bringing a number of benefits such as a hardware representation clearly separated from the kernel code, it has also been introduced as a promise of ABI stability by its proponents.
With the Device Tree, a device manufacturer is supposed to be able to write a Device Tree to describe its platform only once, and be sure that any kernel version shipped *after* the kernel version that was originally used to test the platform will continue to work, using the same Device Tree blob.
In this talk, we discuss this ABI stability requirement: does it actually work? What problems is this causing to kernel development? Are Device Tree bindings sufficiently reviewed to guarantee such a stability?
Speakers Thomas Petazzoni CTO and Embedded Linux Engineer, Free Electrons Thomas Petazzoni is CTO and embedded Linux engineer at Free Electrons. He is a Linux kernel developer working on support for the Marvell Armada 370/XP ARM SoCs, and also older Marvell SoCs, for which a big Device Tree effort has been made the last years. He is also a core developer of Buildroot, one of the most popular embedded Linux build systems.