Op 2 nov. 2012, om 10:26 heeft "Cousson, Benoit" <b-cous...@ti.com> het volgende geschreven:
> Hi Jason, > > On 11/1/2012 7:50 PM, Jason Kridner wrote: >> My apologies for starting a new thread, but I don't have this thread >> in my Inbox. >> >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg81034.html >> >> Tony Lindgren wrote: >> >>> * Pantelis Antoniou <panto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [121031 15:02]: >>>> >>>> So when device's node is 'disabled' of_platform_device_create_pdata() >>>> will not create the device. >>>> >>>> Now, of course it is possible to re-trigger the platform's probe method >>>> to be called, and in fact I do so in the capebus patches. >>> >>> You should fix this in generic way then rather than working >>> around it in capebus. The same problem exists changing >>> between different functionality for the shared pins, >>> let's say between USB pins and UART pins if you want a >>> serial debug console on some phone. >> >> The current capebus solution goes a long way to fixing a huge issue >> for BeagleBone users and I don't understand what seems to be a >> push-back on principle. On BeagleBone capes, these conflicts cannot be >> resolved early. > > I don't think there is any push-back on the principle. It is a very valid > problem that does not have any solution today. > > The comments are more on the implementation. > >> Do you have suggestions on some more generic method? It seems to me >> the proposed capebus approach strikes a good balance. > > Well, yeah, that's a generic DT issue, not a beagle-cape issue. > We should not necessarily handle it by introducing some fake bus and some new > binding like spi-dt / i2c-dt that does not mean anything in term of HW. > > DT is about pure HW representation. Introducing some fake hierarchy to make > SW life easier is not necessarily the good approach. I see, pure HW. Let's look at this: gpio_keys { compatible = "gpio-keys"; pinctrl-names = "default"; pinctrl-0 = <&bone_lcd3_cape_keys_00A0_pins>; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; button@1 { debounce_interval = <50>; linux,code = <105>; label = "left"; gpios = <&gpio2 16 0x0>; gpio-key,wakeup; autorepeat; }; Is the "linux,code" pure hardware or have there already been exceptions to that rule? regards, Koen-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
