On Thu, 06 Dec 2012, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 6 December 2012 16:05, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > Or you could not put unnecessary bindings into the Device Tree > >> > by putting two and two together and realise that using the table > >> > is the correct thing to do instead. This actually gives reason > >> > to you previous patch, but should probably be fixed-up into it > >> > so it has some proper meaning/purpose. ;) > >> > >> Couldn't understand this one :( > > > > Really? > > I tried again, but couldn't get it :( > > > Let's break it down - what do you need "stmpe,id" for? > > To distinguish two instances of of stmpe811 (for instance) on a board. > Names of stmpe sub-modules would contain .0, .1, if we have an id > passed to it. Passing -1 would create same names for both gpio blocks > which belonged to different stmpe811's.
I thought we'd be over this? The 'ID' will be represented by the address of the chip i.e. stmpe1601@40, where '40' will be distinguishing factor? -- Lee Jones Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- 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/