Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751595AbbEGPsh (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2015 11:48:37 -0400 Received: from mail-yh0-f50.google.com ([209.85.213.50]:34550 "EHLO mail-yh0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751158AbbEGPse convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2015 11:48:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20150318055437.21025.13990.stgit@notabene.brown> <55492001.30806@hurleysoftware.com> From: Rob Herring Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 10:48:13 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Gta04-owner] [PATCH 0/3] tty slave device support - version 3. To: "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" Cc: List for communicating with real GTA04 owners , NeilBrown , Mark Rutland , One Thousand Gnomes , Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Sebastian Reichel , Pavel Machek , Grant Likely , Jiri Slaby , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1819 Lines: 48 On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Am 05.05.2015 um 21:54 schrieb Peter Hurley : > >> Hi Neil, >> >> On 03/18/2015 01:58 AM, NeilBrown wrote: >>> here is version 3 of support for tty-slaves. >> >> Is there a v4 of this that I missed? I'm interested in seeing this to completion as well. > We did have a lengthy discussion about [PATCH 3/3] how to best (1) > represent the slave device in the device tree but as far as I am concerned, > I do not see that we have a consensus (2) and the device tree maintainers > have no comments or clear guidelines so far. I'm just catching up on the thread, but I agree with what Sebastian has said at least on regulators. > > BR, > Nikolaus > > (1) best with respect to maintainability, flexibility, common design patterns, > compatibility and some other factors I don’t know the correct english words for > (2) basically the slave can be described as a subnode like for I2C bus slaves > or the slave device can reference the uart it is connected to like for GPIOs > and regulators-- I'm not sure I follow the debate on sub-nodes, but it is a pretty well defined pattern that sub-nodes are describing a connection to parent nodes. Usually it follows the main/data connection and not some side-band connections like regulators or gpios. Rob > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- 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/