3 ms·

IBM PCs use ACPI tables, which are basically the same thing as device trees. It's just that ACPI tables are burnt into the UEFI bootloader on the motherboard, w

IBM PCs use ACPI tables, which are basically the same thing as device trees. It's just that ACPI tables are burnt into the UEFI bootloader on the motherboard, while most SBCs put the bootloader on the same media as the OS. (generally I think this is an area which just hasn't become mainstream enough for this standardisation to be useful: when most of your users are hacking around with the SBC and are happy to just download the vendor's SD card image, there's very little impetus to make something plug-and-play)

throwup238 2y ago
> (generally I think this is an area which just hasn't become mainstream enough for this standardisation to be useful: when most of your users are hacking around with the SBC and are happy to just download the vendor's SD card image, there's very little impetus to make something plug-and-play) I think it's a more subtle problem of embedded software engineering culture being a decade or more behind the rest of software development, especially at any IC company that aren't NVIDIA/Intel/AMD. IME most SBC users are commercial, not users hacking with it (I don't know about this specific dev kit though), and every professional EE I know hates dealing with poorly supported non-mainline linux SBCs. If your company/clients don't commit to a single platform like iMX for years at a time, managing embedded linux is a pain in the ass. That's why RPi was so successful with its compute modules, the community handled a lot of that pain instead of depending on the vendor.
- aidenn0 2y ago
  > embedded software engineering culture being a decade or more behind the rest of software development I'm not sure, because putting the bootloader in EPROM or NOR has been done on embedded boards for years; it's just rare on mass-manufactured general-use SBCs. I don't know if that's because of BOM, convenience for commercial SBC customers, or just to make it harder to brick the board.
- rcxdude 2y ago
  There is that general (much bigger) issue with fragmentation as well. But that's mostly seperate from 'I also need to stick a devicetree on my boot media'. (I do know the pain of non-mainline linux SBCs, and I make some effort to avoid it now: even if it means using old chips, I'll very strongly prefer one with mainline support, note that raspberry pi is also pretty behind on getting their support upstream, even the pi 4 is still lagging, and the pi 5 isn't even usable. They just have some vaguely decent support for their fork)
kiririn 2y ago
There’s a lot of value in being able to boot to a working state without your operating system needing explicitly seeded with intricate knowledge of the hardware. Not to mention the huge differences between proprietary vendor kernel device trees and mainline, so what the vendor supplies may be worthless. No matter how broken acpi etc is at least it’s compatible
IcePic 2y ago
This still feels like a poor idea. It is as if the manufacturer of the boards don't really know where the serial port is mapped or where the USB is, but 3 months later someone will fix a DTB that allows you to find it. Noone would accept an x86 pc to not know itself well enough to hand you a list of its parts, but for some reason having to find the right mix of kernel, u-boot and DTB is considered "fine" for ARM boards, which I don't really understand.

throwup238 2y ago

> (generally I think this is an area which just hasn't become mainstream enough for this standardisation to be useful: when most of your users are hacking around with the SBC and are happy to just download the vendor's SD card image, there's very little impetus to make something plug-and-play) I think it's a more subtle problem of embedded software engineering culture being a decade or more behind the rest of software development, especially at any IC company that aren't NVIDIA/Intel/AMD. IME most SBC users are commercial, not users hacking with it (I don't know about this specific dev kit though), and every professional EE I know hates dealing with poorly supported non-mainline linux SBCs. If your company/clients don't commit to a single platform like iMX for years at a time, managing embedded linux is a pain in the ass. That's why RPi was so successful with its compute modules, the community handled a lot of that pain instead of depending on the vendor.

aidenn0 2y ago
> embedded software engineering culture being a decade or more behind the rest of software development I'm not sure, because putting the bootloader in EPROM or NOR has been done on embedded boards for years; it's just rare on mass-manufactured general-use SBCs. I don't know if that's because of BOM, convenience for commercial SBC customers, or just to make it harder to brick the board.
rcxdude 2y ago
There is that general (much bigger) issue with fragmentation as well. But that's mostly seperate from 'I also need to stick a devicetree on my boot media'. (I do know the pain of non-mainline linux SBCs, and I make some effort to avoid it now: even if it means using old chips, I'll very strongly prefer one with mainline support, note that raspberry pi is also pretty behind on getting their support upstream, even the pi 4 is still lagging, and the pi 5 isn't even usable. They just have some vaguely decent support for their fork)

kiririn 2y ago

There’s a lot of value in being able to boot to a working state without your operating system needing explicitly seeded with intricate knowledge of the hardware. Not to mention the huge differences between proprietary vendor kernel device trees and mainline, so what the vendor supplies may be worthless. No matter how broken acpi etc is at least it’s compatible

IcePic 2y ago

This still feels like a poor idea. It is as if the manufacturer of the boards don't really know where the serial port is mapped or where the USB is, but 3 months later someone will fix a DTB that allows you to find it. Noone would accept an x86 pc to not know itself well enough to hand you a list of its parts, but for some reason having to find the right mix of kernel, u-boot and DTB is considered "fine" for ARM boards, which I don't really understand.