On 7/25/19 2:47 AM, Richard Tresidder wrote:
> If the of_node name of the supply is available from the devicetree binding
> then include it under the var POWER_SUPPLY_OF_NODE_NAME.
> This helps where a consistent name is known via the device tree binding
> but it is hard to identify based on the usual enumeration process.
>
Would it be possible to use of_device_uevent() instead of introducing a new
property?
Hi David
That it would be. I wasn't aware of that call.
I'll give it a crack and send in a new version of the patch.
Cheers
Richard Tresidder
Richard Tresidder
On 25/07/2019 10:08 pm, David Lechner wrote:
> On 7/25/19 2:47 AM, Richard Tresidder wrote:
>> If the of_node name of the supply is available from the devicetree
>> binding
>> then include it under the var POWER_SUPPLY_OF_NODE_NAME.
>> This helps where a consistent name is known via the device tree binding
>> but it is hard to identify based on the usual enumeration process.
>>
>
> Would it be possible to use of_device_uevent() instead of introducing
> a new
> property?
>
>
>