Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964842AbXABM3y (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jan 2007 07:29:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964839AbXABM3y (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jan 2007 07:29:54 -0500 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:50348 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964837AbXABM3x (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jan 2007 07:29:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1167710537.6165.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <45978CE9.7090700@flex.com> <20061231.024917.59652177.davem@davemloft.net> <20061231154103.GA7409@infradead.org> <20061231.124612.21926488.davem@davemloft.net> <45988210.7070300@flex.com> <1167710537.6165.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devel@laptop.org, David Miller , David Kahn , wmb@firmworks.com, hch@infradead.org, jg@laptop.org From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH] Open Firmware device tree virtual filesystem Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 13:28:52 +0100 To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.623) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1391 Lines: 37 >> IMHO, the directory entries in the filesystem >> should be in the form "node-name@unit-address" (eg: /pci@1f,0, >> "pci" is the node name, "@" is the separator character defined >> by IEEE 1275, and "1f,0" is the unit-address, >> which are always guaranteed to be unique. > > They should be. The problem is buggy OF implementations. For example, > both IBM and Apple OFs have the nasty habit of having under the CPU > nodes an "l2-cache" node with no unit-address -and- a property with the > same name That is perfectly valid FWIW. Not a "best practice" or anything, but valid nonetheless. Device tree semantics do not fit POSIX filesystem semantics 100%, you do need some workarounds for some edge cases yes. >> It's >> not possible to have two ambiguously fully qualified nodes in the OFW >> device tree, otherwise you would never be able to select >> a specific one by name. > > Well, it happens to be the case though. The code is to work around > that. > A normal bug-free tree should never trigger the workarounds. Well it's not *technically* a bug to have two device nodes with an exact identical path in OF, but sure :-) Segher - 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/