On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Pantelis Antoniou <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Rob, > >> On Jun 15, 2015, at 16:24 , Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Pantelis Antoniou >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Documentation ABI entry for overlays sysfs entries. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Pantelis Antoniou <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> .../ABI/testing/sysfs-firmware-devicetree-overlays | 35 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 >>> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-firmware-devicetree-overlays >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-firmware-devicetree-overlays >>> b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-firmware-devicetree-overlays >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000..be2d28b >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-firmware-devicetree-overlays >>> @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
[...] >>> + >>> + targets: A file containing the list of targets of each >>> overlay >>> + with each line containing a target. >> >> We have OF nodes in sysfs now. Would it be more useful if we created >> links to the target nodes instead of having a list of names? >> > > Probably, this interface is merely informational; things get complicated by > the fact that there can be more than one target in each overlay. Right, you would need 'targetN' or perhaps '<node name>' (with a '.N' for duplicates) as the link names. If it is informational, then perhaps debugfs should be used instead? What else if anything do you envision adding here? Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
