On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 01:42:02PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 09/16/2011 01:22 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >Then we are arguing about minor detail. But according to you this minor > >detail will prevent us from walking device tree up to the root, so it is > >not so minor for me. > > There is no root. It's not a tree. The composition tree (which > we've been talking about using for canonical pathnames) has nothing > to do with the buses.
Yep, I completely agree. The bus used by a CPU (and how do you decide which CPU cause different CPU's might have differnt access paths) to accesse devices may just be one out of multiple other access paths to the device. Cheers
