Hi Pavel,
Am 27.04.2015 um 22:35 schrieb Pavel Machek :
> Hi!
>
>>> In my opinion making something a node in / is always the
>>> last resort and in my perspective it has been handled in such a way
>>> so far.
>>
>> But that contradicts some documents I have found and linked. Please
>> show me
Hi Pavel,
Am 27.04.2015 um 22:35 schrieb Pavel Machek pa...@ucw.cz:
Hi!
In my opinion making something a node in / is always the
last resort and in my perspective it has been handled in such a way
so far.
But that contradicts some documents I have found and linked. Please
show me a
Hi!
> > In my opinion making something a node in / is always the
> > last resort and in my perspective it has been handled in such a way
> > so far.
>
> But that contradicts some documents I have found and linked. Please
> show me a document about DT that supports your view.
>
> I agree that
Hi!
In my opinion making something a node in / is always the
last resort and in my perspective it has been handled in such a way
so far.
But that contradicts some documents I have found and linked. Please
show me a document about DT that supports your view.
I agree that both views
Hi!
> >> And if you want to hide uart1 from the user-space, that should be a
> >> property
> >> of the uart1 node (whereever it is defined).
> >
> > Sorry? That would be one heck of layering violation.
>
> Which layering?
Device tree is not operating system specific. It does not know what
Hi!
And if you want to hide uart1 from the user-space, that should be a
property
of the uart1 node (whereever it is defined).
Sorry? That would be one heck of layering violation.
Which layering?
Device tree is not operating system specific. It does not know what
user space is, and
Am 27.03.2015 um 17:31 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:22:11AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> Coming back at my sentence: I asked about a non-trivial, non-bus
>>> connected HW, which has a DT binding.
>>
>> from omap3-beagle-xm.dts:
>> hsusb2_phy
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:22:11AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> > Coming back at my sentence: I asked about a non-trivial, non-bus
> > connected HW, which has a DT binding.
>
> from omap3-beagle-xm.dts:
> hsusb2_phy (connected through ULPI)
> gpio-keys (it is not a trivial
Hi,
Am 26.03.2015 um 19:08 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 05:44:42PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> Am 25.03.2015 um 16:21 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Am 25.03.2015 um
Hi,
Am 26.03.2015 um 19:08 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 05:44:42PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Am 25.03.2015 um 16:21 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Am 27.03.2015 um 17:31 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:22:11AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Coming back at my sentence: I asked about a non-trivial, non-bus
connected HW, which has a DT binding.
from omap3-beagle-xm.dts:
hsusb2_phy
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:22:11AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Coming back at my sentence: I asked about a non-trivial, non-bus
connected HW, which has a DT binding.
from omap3-beagle-xm.dts:
hsusb2_phy (connected through ULPI)
gpio-keys (it is not a trivial on/off)
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 05:44:42PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Am 25.03.2015 um 16:21 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> >> Am 25.03.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
> >>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at
Hi,
Am 26.03.2015 um 06:56 schrieb Pavel Machek :
> Hi!
>
> Main reason is, that I would need to go
> through the UART to “communicate" with the w2sg0004.
You can always "communicate” through the UART. Even without DT. As long as
the connected chip is powered up by any
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 05:44:42PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Am 25.03.2015 um 16:21 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Am 25.03.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
On
Hi,
Am 26.03.2015 um 06:56 schrieb Pavel Machek pa...@ucw.cz:
Hi!
Main reason is, that I would need to go
through the UART to “communicate with the w2sg0004.
You can always communicate” through the UART. Even without DT. As long as
the connected chip is powered up by any means (could be
Hi!
> >>> Main reason is, that I would need to go
> >>> through the UART to “communicate" with the w2sg0004.
> >>
> >> You can always "communicate” through the UART. Even without DT. As long as
> >> the connected chip is powered up by any means (could be some
> >> fixed-regulator
> >> or hard
Am 25.03.2015 um 21:53 schrieb Pavel Machek :
> Hi!
>
AFAIK the chip simply starts to emit NMEA records if powered on.
There is no command going over the serial interface to address it
or control it.
>>>
>>> Right, since GPS basically doesn't need any configuration/control.
>>>
Hi,
Am 25.03.2015 um 21:42 schrieb Pavel Machek :
> Hi!
>
>>> In the case of our GPS, it receives control over the serial connection from
>>> the UART,
>>
>> Ahem - does it?
>>
>> AFAIK the chip simply starts to emit NMEA records if powered on. There is no
>> command going over the serial
Hi!
> >> AFAIK the chip simply starts to emit NMEA records if powered on.
> >> There is no command going over the serial interface to address it
> >> or control it.
> >
> > Right, since GPS basically doesn't need any configuration/control.
> > That’s not true for other UART attached devices,
Hi!
> > In the case of our GPS, it receives control over the serial connection from
> > the UART,
>
> Ahem - does it?
>
> AFAIK the chip simply starts to emit NMEA records if powered on. There is no
> command going over the serial interface to address it or control it.
Well _most_ GPSes enable
Hi,
Am 25.03.2015 um 16:21 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> Am 25.03.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
So you propose that
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Am 25.03.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> >> So you propose that the parent->child relationship is “control”? I.e. some
> >>
Hi,
Am 25.03.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Sebastian Reichel :
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> So you propose that the parent->child relationship is “control”? I.e. some
>> channel which allows to address some bus client (through ) and
>> control
Hi,
Am 25.03.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
So you propose that the parent-child relationship is “control”? I.e. some
channel which allows to address some bus client (through reg) and
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Am 25.03.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
So you propose that the parent-child relationship is “control”? I.e. some
Hi,
Am 25.03.2015 um 16:21 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Am 25.03.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Sebastian Reichel s...@kernel.org:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Hi!
AFAIK the chip simply starts to emit NMEA records if powered on.
There is no command going over the serial interface to address it
or control it.
Right, since GPS basically doesn't need any configuration/control.
That’s not true for other UART attached devices, though.
Do you
Hi,
Am 25.03.2015 um 21:42 schrieb Pavel Machek pa...@ucw.cz:
Hi!
In the case of our GPS, it receives control over the serial connection from
the UART,
Ahem - does it?
AFAIK the chip simply starts to emit NMEA records if powered on. There is no
command going over the serial interface
Hi!
In the case of our GPS, it receives control over the serial connection from
the UART,
Ahem - does it?
AFAIK the chip simply starts to emit NMEA records if powered on. There is no
command going over the serial interface to address it or control it.
Well _most_ GPSes enable you to
Am 25.03.2015 um 21:53 schrieb Pavel Machek pa...@ucw.cz:
Hi!
AFAIK the chip simply starts to emit NMEA records if powered on.
There is no command going over the serial interface to address it
or control it.
Right, since GPS basically doesn't need any configuration/control.
That’s not
Hi!
Main reason is, that I would need to go
through the UART to “communicate with the w2sg0004.
You can always communicate” through the UART. Even without DT. As long as
the connected chip is powered up by any means (could be some
fixed-regulator
or hard wired).
But you don't
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> So you propose that the parent->child relationship is “control”? I.e. some
> channel which allows to address some bus client (through ) and
> control that devices.
>
> Makes sense. This is how i2c and spi clients are
Hi,
Am 21.03.2015 um 00:31 schrieb NeilBrown :
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 10:34:18 +0100 "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller"
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 20.03.2015 um 09:54 schrieb NeilBrown :
>
>>> There needs to be one device-node for each device, and that device-node
>>> needs
>>> to be a child of the
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
So you propose that the parent-child relationship is “control”? I.e. some
channel which allows to address some bus client (through reg) and
control that devices.
Makes sense. This is how i2c and spi clients are
Hi,
Am 21.03.2015 um 00:31 schrieb NeilBrown ne...@suse.de:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 10:34:18 +0100 Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller
h...@goldelico.com wrote:
Am 20.03.2015 um 09:54 schrieb NeilBrown ne...@suse.de:
There needs to be one device-node for each device, and that device-node
needs
to
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 10:34:18 +0100 "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller"
wrote:
>
> Am 20.03.2015 um 09:54 schrieb NeilBrown :
> > There needs to be one device-node for each device, and that device-node
> > needs
> > to be a child of the device-node for the device which is the primary
> > connection to
Hi!
> >>
> >> Wouldn’t it be easier to simply write
> >>
> >> {
> >>vdd-suppy = <>;
> >> }
> >
> > Easier to write: certainly.
> > Easier to justify? No.
>
> I just justified.
>
> > Easier to get merged upstream? Definitely not.
>
> Are you the maintainer?
And you? I believe Neil is
Am 20.03.2015 um 09:54 schrieb NeilBrown :
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 08:54:38 +0100 "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller"
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 18.03.2015 um 06:58 schrieb NeilBrown :
>>
>>> If a platform has a particular device permanently attached to a UART,
>>> there may be out-of-band signaling necessary
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 08:54:38 +0100 "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller"
wrote:
>
> Am 18.03.2015 um 06:58 schrieb NeilBrown :
>
> > If a platform has a particular device permanently attached to a UART,
> > there may be out-of-band signaling necessary to power the device
> > on and off.
> >
> > This
Am 18.03.2015 um 06:58 schrieb NeilBrown :
> If a platform has a particular device permanently attached to a UART,
> there may be out-of-band signaling necessary to power the device
> on and off.
>
> This driver controls that signalling for a number of different devices.
> It can
> -
Am 18.03.2015 um 06:58 schrieb NeilBrown n...@brown.name:
If a platform has a particular device permanently attached to a UART,
there may be out-of-band signaling necessary to power the device
on and off.
This driver controls that signalling for a number of different devices.
It can
-
Am 20.03.2015 um 09:54 schrieb NeilBrown ne...@suse.de:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 08:54:38 +0100 Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller
h...@goldelico.com wrote:
Am 18.03.2015 um 06:58 schrieb NeilBrown n...@brown.name:
If a platform has a particular device permanently attached to a UART,
there may be
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 10:34:18 +0100 Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller
h...@goldelico.com wrote:
Am 20.03.2015 um 09:54 schrieb NeilBrown ne...@suse.de:
There needs to be one device-node for each device, and that device-node
needs
to be a child of the device-node for the device which is the
Hi!
Wouldn’t it be easier to simply write
uart1 {
vdd-suppy = vaux4;
}
Easier to write: certainly.
Easier to justify? No.
I just justified.
Easier to get merged upstream? Definitely not.
Are you the maintainer?
And you? I believe Neil is right here, and this
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 08:54:38 +0100 Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller
h...@goldelico.com wrote:
Am 18.03.2015 um 06:58 schrieb NeilBrown n...@brown.name:
If a platform has a particular device permanently attached to a UART,
there may be out-of-band signaling necessary to power the device
on and
46 matches
Mail list logo
