Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Jun 4, 2008, at 4:43 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > >> David Gibson wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 09:33:12AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: >>>> On Jun 3, 2008, at 5:08 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >>>>> Kumar Gala wrote: >>>>>> On Jun 1, 2008, at 9:03 PM, David Gibson wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 08:49:45AM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >>> [snip] >>>>>>> You have a whole lot of 'cell-index' properties through both these >>>>>>> trees, and they all look wrong. cell-index is a hack, which >>>>>>> should be >>>>>>> avoided wherever practical - it should only be used when the index >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> used to offset into some global register block, never simply to >>>>>>> differentiate (use reg for that) or name the devices (use aliases >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> that). >>>>>> this is why FSL device tree's have cell-index. We have global >>>>>> control >>>>>> registers that need to know such things. >>>>> Should I remove them or not? OF is still a mystery for me :-(. >>>> Don't remove them. >>> >>> Yes, they're ok, given this usage. >> >> I'm puzzled. Could someone point me to some real code where cell-index >> is used as a pointer into some global data. Sorry for my ignorance. > > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-June/057254.html
Yep, I saw that it's used for I2C (and SPI). But "cell-index" is also defined for network, serial and PCI nodes, which are also assigned via aliases. Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev