On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 04:08:36PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 16:03 +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > > Do you mean we could allow multiple devices on the one bus to have the same > > name, but get sysfs to notice and de-duplicate by mangling one name? I don't > > think I like that but I might have misunderstood. > > What other option do we have ? > > > On my device I seem to have some platform devices registered through > > device-tree, and some registered through platform_device_add (e.g. > > 'alarmtimer'). Guaranteeing they remain disjoint sets if the kernel is > > allowed to evolve independently of the devicetree might be tricky.... > > Maybe we need "/sys/devices/platform" and "/sys/devices/dt_platform" ?? > > No, I think device-tree created platform devices should go > to /sys/devices/platform like the "classic" ones. > > The problem is really how to deal with potential name duplication. We > could try to register, if we get -EEXIST (assuming sysfs returns the > right stuff), try again with ".1" etc... How can there be device name collisions? All platform devices _should_ be named uniquely, if not, you have bigger problems... thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
