[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130918012557.GA22725@voom.fritz.box>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:25:57 +1000
From: David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>
To: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: "memory" binding issues
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 02:08:33PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 9/17/2013 9:43 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:56:39AM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> >> I'm afraid that I must disagree. For consistency I'd rather go with what
> >> Ben said. Please see ePAPR chapter 2.2.1.1, which clearly defines how
> >> nodes should be named.
> >
> > 2.2.1.1 is there to point out that unit address _has_ to reflect reg.
> >
> > 2.2.3 says that unit addresses can be omitted.
>
> 2.2.3 is talking about path names.
>
> 2.2.1.1 is talking about node names.
>
> 2.2.1.1 _does_ require the unit address in the node name, 2.2.3 does not
> remove that requirement.
Certainly the recommendation I've been giving from the early days of
ePAPR has been that a node should have a unit address if and only if
it has a 'reg' property.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists