On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:32:46AM -0700, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: devicetree-discuss- > > [email protected] > [mailto:devicetree- > > [email protected]] On Behalf > Of > > David VomLehn > > Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 4:45 PM > > To: [email protected]; [email protected]; > > [email protected]; [email protected]; > > [email protected] > > Subject: Wrapping proprietary nodes > > > > I expect my device tree will have some proprietary, one-off devices in > it. ... > > Or should they be specified one node at a time: > > > > cisco-device1 { > > ... > > }; > > cisco-device2 { > > ... > > }; > > > > My inclination is for the former, but I'd prefer to follow existing > usage, > > if any. > > (David, long time no see...:) > > The device tree should represent your hardware as it is. If these > devices sit on some bus, then you should probably represent the > bus, with the devices as subnodes. Don't create logical container > nodes unless they are warranted for some good reason. > > Stuart
Makes sense. My example uses the prefix "cisco-"; does this follow common usage? -- David VL _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
