When the driver no longer requires the port number, it's easy to drop. Until then, I'll keep it in. Also, I'm not so sure that moving to completely generic names is really worth the effort... All the 'semantically' interesting' information is already in the device tree somewhere else. In the limit, the node name could just be a randomly generated string. So now we have a matter of taste: what is the right amount of detail to put in so that someone who looks at the tree can easily understand what's going on, but not be overwhelmed? The xilinx ip name seems to usually do that almost as well as a 'generic name'. Anyway, you proved me wrong last time after a bunch of mulling it over, so maybe I'll just take your word for it and do it that way. :) In other news, my computer seems to have died this morning, so productivity may be low. :) Steve
________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Grant Likely Sent: Mon 12/17/2007 7:19 AM To: Stephen Neuendorffer Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; David Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] [POWERPC] Xilinx: Update booting-without-of. > reg = <d1000fc0 20>; > }; > }; > @@ -2513,6 +2521,9 @@ platforms are moved over to use the > flattened-device-tree model. > > Requred properties: > - current-speed : Baud rate of uartlite > + Optional properties: > + - port-number : unique ordinal index of the device. This > + property is required for a console on uartlite. And has already been discussed, drop the port-number property. I'll rework the uartlite driver to use aliases instead. Cheers, g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (403) 399-0195
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
