Hi Jason,
On 11/1/2012 7:50 PM, Jason Kridner wrote:
My apologies for starting a new thread, but I don't have this thread
in my Inbox.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg81034.html
Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Pantelis Antoniou <panto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [121031 15:02]:
So when device's node is 'disabled' of_platform_device_create_pdata()
will not create the device.
Now, of course it is possible to re-trigger the platform's probe method
to be called, and in fact I do so in the capebus patches.
You should fix this in generic way then rather than working
around it in capebus. The same problem exists changing
between different functionality for the shared pins,
let's say between USB pins and UART pins if you want a
serial debug console on some phone.
The current capebus solution goes a long way to fixing a huge issue
for BeagleBone users and I don't understand what seems to be a
push-back on principle. On BeagleBone capes, these conflicts cannot be
resolved early.
I don't think there is any push-back on the principle. It is a very
valid problem that does not have any solution today.
The comments are more on the implementation.
Do you have suggestions on some more generic method? It seems to me
the proposed capebus approach strikes a good balance.
Well, yeah, that's a generic DT issue, not a beagle-cape issue.
We should not necessarily handle it by introducing some fake bus and
some new binding like spi-dt / i2c-dt that does not mean anything in
term of HW.
DT is about pure HW representation. Introducing some fake hierarchy to
make SW life easier is not necessarily the good approach.
Adding the version information in the nodes is potentially a good idea,
but should clearly be well thought and part of the DT core.
Regards,
Benoit
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
