[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131204124929.GO29268@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 12:49:29 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] mfd: max14577: Add device tree bindings document
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 11:20:39AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > + regulators {
> > + compatible = "maxim,max14577-regulator";
> > +
> > + safeout_reg: safeout@1 {
> The name of the node (not the label:safeout_reg) usually depicts the
> type of device, so 'regulator@0' and 'regulator@1'. However, I'm
> unsure how this works when these nodes are encapsulated by an
> overarching 'regulators' parent node.
> Perhaps Mark can answer this?
The name there is meaningless, the DT convention is as you describe and
applies to any node but equally well it's just a convention and I
struggle to see the value it adds. Having something that humans find
helpful is just as well.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists