[snip] > There is no child device node, but there are child interrupt > nodes, and > since the interrupt-tree uses #address/size-cells, it does make some > sense to specify them. > > Yes, there is a default value when absent, but the simple > fact that the > default is different depending if you are doing a device walk or an > interrupt tree walk is very confusing. As I said above, the default > values are a source of more problem than anything else and I tend to > think they should be banned. > > I would personally be inclined to define that whatever spec we come up > with always require #address-cells/#size-cells for any node that can > have either device children or interrupt children, and ban default > values alltogether.
Did you really mean #size-cells here? Shouldn't it be #interrupt-cells? Stuart _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
