[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141213174640.GA18961@earth.universe>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 18:46:41 +0100
From: Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>
Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] TTY: add support for "tty slave" devices.
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:59:20AM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
> [...]
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/of-serial.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/of-serial.txt
> > @@ -39,6 +39,10 @@ Optional properties:
> > driver is allowed to detect support for the capability even without this
> > property.
> >
> > +Optional child node:
> > +- a platform device listed as a child node will be probed and
> > + powered-on whenever the tty is in use (open).
> > +
>
> The biggest concern I have is what happens to nodes that already have
> child devices that /don't/ match this use case? It is possible that some
> UART nodes already have a child node used to store other data. There are
> two ways to handle this; 1) add a new bool property that indicates the
> child nodes are tty slave devices, or 2) Make each uart driver
> explicitly enable the feature so that driver authors can check if it is
> a problem for that device. I personally would suggest #1 because then it
> can be enabled in generic code.
maybe simple depend on the compatible value? If the UART node has
child nodes to store other random data it should not have a
compatible value?
-- Sebastian
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists