On Wed, 8 May 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 08 May 2013, Greg KH wrote: > > > just mention there is not hardware reason to not use the generic ttySx > > > in place of ttyAS as we have only one IP that handle serial on this > > > family of SoC > > > > > > personally I'll switch to ttySx > > > > Great, then you can use the same major/minor range as well, so there's > > no more objection from me about this :) > > Does that work these days when you have kernel with multiple built-in > uart drivers? > > I think it would be good if all uarts were using the same name space > and major/minor numbers, but I think the mess we currently have is > the result of the tty_register_driver() interface reserving the > device number range at driver load time, independent of the presence > of devices. I would assume that normal distro kernels always ship > with an 8250 driver built-in to allow using that as the console, > and if I read the code correctly, that currently prevents another > uart driver from registering the same major/minor numbers.
I tried to fix this up over 10 years ago. RMK tried as well. This failed because X86 people insisted on always having COM1 as /dev/ttyS0, COM3 as /dev/ttyS2 and so on, even when some of them weren't present. A common and dynamic namespace eventually succeeded for hard disks. Maybe people are ready to accept it for serial ports as well now? Nicolas _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
