On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:42:14PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Mitch Bradley <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I wonder if it makes sense to create a new device node "/linux-devices" to >> > express a desired mapping from device nodes to /dev entries? The >> > properties could be the names of device special files and the values the >> > corresponding node phandles. >> >> I've been trying /really/ hard to avoid doing something like that >> because a lot of the time the desired Linux dev name is a >> implementation detail, and a potentially unstable one at that. If >> Linux requires certain devices to have certain names because that is >> how it hooks up clocks > > As I keep on saying, we don't _have_ to have to match on device name. > If DT can come up with a better way to bind a clock to a particular > device/connection name then DT can provide its own clk_get() > implementation which does that.
Sorry, I overstated the situation. My point is only that I don't want encode how Linux currently views the world into the DT, because implementation details can and do change. g. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
