On 12/08/2011 02:24 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com> wrote: >> On 12/06/2011 02:23 PM, Simon Glass wrote: ... >> I think the best implementation would be to enumerate everything solely >> based on compatible flags, and allowing "usb start" to accept either an >> alias name (which would be fixed) or a DT unit address or node name >> (which would be fixed) or a controller index (which might vary based on >> enumeration order) to select the controller. >> >> The next best implementation would be to enumerate solely based on >> compatible flags, then sort the list based on alias, thus allowing alias >> to cause a static order. >> >> However, enumerating based on alias, then enumerating based on >> compatible flags and adding any missing nodes would be fine. > > Well ok. Since this is basically a small *addition* to the code > (scanning things that don't have an alias), and will have no effect > with the device tree as included in this series, I would like to do > this as a follow-on patch after the series. I hope you can live with > that also?
I suppose it'll have to do. It's totally the wrong way to go about it though, and will provide a bad example that'll probably end up proliferating itself through the code since it's the first example. In other words rather than: Now: Scan /aliases for USB, add then all. Later: Scan device nodes for any that weren't in /aliases, add them all I'd prefer to see: Now: Scan /aliases for USB, add then all. Later: Remove all the /aliases scanning code, fix the code to scan all child nodes of the SoC node, find all nodes matching the USB compatible flag, add them all. While adding a USB controller, check the /alias node and honor any alias there if there is one. -- nvpublic _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot