On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 12:46:39 -0600 "Grant Likely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (And I'm talking about I2C, not DMA. I don't care about DMA because > > this conversation will go off into the weeds if we start talking about > > cell-index and every possible device out there.) > > I need to disagree here. Behavior should never be dependent on device > tree order. It should be absolutely fine for devices to be probed in > a different order and different bus ids to be assigned. Meh. I'll begrudgingly agree. > In Timur's case, it is absolutely appropriate to use cell-index and/or > a phandle to make sure it gets the correct DMA registers (which is > what cell-index is intended to solve). It is not appropriate to > depend on that same number to also be the logical i2c bus number. Hence "index" would be a better fit for the latter then, yes? josh _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev