On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Wolfram Sang <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > >> For example with "uio" compatible string: >> static const struct of_device_id __devinitconst uio_of_genirq_match[] = { >> { .compatible = "uio", }, >> { /* empty for now */ }, >> }; > > Please use a proper example with "vendor,device". > (And after that it won't be empty anymore)
My vote is, and always has been 'generic-uio' :) Putting some random vendor/device string in there is just nuts. Do you really want a kernel patch every time some one binds their device to it? Or, is there no expectation that anybody would attempt to merge such a pointless patch to begin with? As we discussed at ELC, putting a real vendor/device in there is also broken because all instances in the system wil bind to the generic uio, which is not necessarily what is desired. I know the arguments against the 'generic-uio' tag, but come on, let's look at the lesser of two evils here! I call BS on this DTS purity. John _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
