Grant Likely wrote: > On 10/15/07, Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> For associating a device node with a human readable label, I'd >> prefer a "label" property in the device node, rather than doing it >> backwards with aliases. > > Here the corresponding problem; having to scan every device node to > make sure you don't assign a number already selected by another node > (in the case where one node is assigned a number and another is not). > Don't Do That(tm). If you use this mechanism, and an adapter node doesn't have a bus number, then it doesn't get to pre-register devices, but instead must use i2c_new_device.
>>> As per your point below; if all the i2c devices are children of >>> the adapter, then yes you are right that the bus number doesn't >>> matter to the user. But it *does* matter for things like serial >>> and ethernet ports. >> And a label property would be great for that. :-) > > Not really; if the user needs to renumber devices; you don't want him > fiddling around in the hardware description. Why would the user renumber devices? > Just like the chosen node; an aliases describes logical constructs, > not physical ones. I don't think this is any different from the > linux,stdout-path property in chosen. Well, it's somewhat different in that stdout describes a usage of the device, not the identity. Still, I don't like linux,stdout-path. :-) At the very least it should be a phandle. -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
