lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: new driver (hvcs) review request and sysfs questions
From
Date
On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 15:22, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 09:12:09PM -0600, Dave Boutcher wrote:
> >
> > It is also true that it is unlike the representation of most other things
> > in sysfs, so perhaps this is the time to change before it gets too baked
> > into things.
>
> I agree. Is there any reason we _have_ to stick with the OF names? It
> seems to me to make more sense here not to, to make it more like the
> rest of the kernel.
>
> That is, if the address after the @ is unique. Is that always the case?

That is the problem... I didn't check my OF spec, but I do remember
clearly cases where the "unit address" isn't unique... This happens
typically at the root of the device-tree, or with pseudo devices,
where you can have several entries with an @0 unit address. However,
I yet have to see that for things that are worth putting into sysfs ;)

One thing though is that it's only unique at a given level of
hierarchy. The Unit Address in OF has no meaning outside of the
context of the parent bus. That may be just fine for sysfs, but
if I take as an example the PCI devices, they do have a globally
unique ID here with the domain number.

Ben.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:01    [W:0.070 / U:0.728 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site