On 14:39 Mon 12 Mar , Scott Wood wrote: > On 03/09/2012 10:36 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > >>>> Ugh. so any value other than 1 returns false? I think that will > >>>> surprise > >>>> most people. > >>>> > >>>> I don't like this api or binding. If it is a bool property, then why > >>>> isn't > >>>> simply testing for the property existance sufficient? > >>> no if you want to disable it > >>> > >>> if a bool is define in the dtsi and want to disable it int the dts > >>> > >>> if you we can do the the invert > >>> > >>> if !0 => true > >>> > >>> is-ok; => true > >>> is-ok = <val != 0>; => true > >>> is-ok = <0>; => false > >> > >> This is a failure of the dtc tool, not the binding. Accepting this binding > >> means we have to live with it for a very long time. It needs to be fixed > >> in dtc instead so that properties can be deleted instead of only modified. > > I understand your idea but today if you put and value in the property it's > > true. > > > > So is-ok = <0>; is true also which is illogical as in any language a > > boolean is > > true (1) or false (0). When I read the property I will understand false not > > true > > You could say similar things about is-ok = "no" or is-ok = "" or is-ok = > "I'd rather you didn't"... it's expected that violating the binding may > produce illogical results. today is most of the binding people use a number whe the want to be able to delete it and it's the same in most of the promgramming language
Best Regards, J. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
