On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 19:47:08 -0700
Grant Likely <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:34:42PM -0800, Andres Salomon wrote:
> >
> > Commit e2f2a93b changed dp->name from using the 'name' property to
> > using package-to-path. This fixed /proc/device-tree creation by
> > eliminating conflicts between names (the 'name' property provides
> > names like 'battery', whereas package-to-path provides names like
> > '/foo/bar/battery@0', which we stripped to 'battery@0'). However,
> > it also breaks of_device_id table matching.
> >
> > The fix that we _really_ wanted was to keep dp->name based upon
> > the name property ('battery'), but based dp->full_name upon
> > package-to-path ('battery@0'). This patch does just that.
> >
> > This also changes OLPC behavior to use the full result from
> > package-to-path for full_name, rather than stripping the directory
> > out. In practice, the strings end up being exactly the same; this
> > change saves time, code, and memory.
> >
> > v2: combine two patches and revert of_pdt_node_name to original
> > version v3: use dp->phandle instead of passing around node
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andres Salomon <[email protected]>
>
> This addresses one of my comments on v2; but it doesn't address the
> comment that the broken implementation of of_pdt_node_name for
> non-sparc still remains, or am I missing something?
>
> g.
>
I responded to that -
http://www.spinics.net/lists/sparclinux/msg08058.html
_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
