Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Monday 11 January 2016 14:57:46 Martin Sperl wrote: >> > On 11.01.2016, at 13:21, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > Please just add another patch to rename the existing uarts appropriately >> > first, then add this one on top with the correct name. >> >> I can do that with the next incarnation of the patch. >> >> But would that not break dt-source files, that refer to uart0? >> Is this not considered an API change as well or does this only apply >> to the binary files? > > To clarify: I meant you should change the node name, not the label. > > The label is not part of the dtb data that gets passed to the kernel > and can have any value, including "uart0". > > The node name is part of the dtb and should follow common naming > conventions (per ePAPR), but the kernel doesn't actually care, so > it won't break anything. > > There are cases where a bootloader relies on a particular node name > in order to find a device node and patch its properties, but I don't > think this is the case here. Confirmed, the booloader source I have doesn't do anything with uart nodes.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
