> -----Original Message----- > From: David Gibson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2008 6:41 PM > To: Yoder Stuart-B08248 > Cc: Kumar Gala; devicetree-discuss > Subject: Re: generating a phandle w/libfdt? > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 09:29:21AM -0700, Yoder Stuart wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > rg > > > [mailto:devicetree-discuss-bounces+stuart.yoder=freescale.com@ > > ozlabs.org] On Behalf Of Kumar Gala > > > Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 9:19 AM > > > To: devicetree-discuss > > > Subject: Re: generating a phandle w/libfdt? > > > > > > > > > On Oct 24, 2008, at 8:11 AM, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > > > > > In some work I'm doing I noticed we don't have any APIs to > > > generate > > > > a phandle via libfdt. > > > > > > > > was wondering if anyone had ideas on this. > > > > > > > > In first thought it seems we have to scan through the > whole blob > > > > looking for the largest phandle id and than +1 it to > generate the > > > > next "valid" id. Any other ideas on how to do this more > > > efficiently? > > > > > > The other question is there a way today to create a > phandle even if > > > there isn't a reference to it elsewhere in a .dts? > > > > We had this issue and the 'hack' was to create a phandle property > > in the node itself, so it was self-referenced. That caused DTC > > to allocate a phandle. We then could reference the node from > > dynamically generated nodes. > > That's nasty. I should add a way to make dtc generate a phandle for a > node, even if it's not referenced from elsewhere. Just need to think > of a decent syntax.
We could add a flag to DTC to generate phandles for all nodes. Only downside I can see is an additional 4 bytes per node. Stuart _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
