Hi Frank, On Thu, 2017-07-13 at 14:40 -0700, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 07/13/17 14:22, Phil Elwell wrote: > > On 13/07/2017 21:07, Frank Rowand wrote: > >> On 07/13/17 12:38, Phil Elwell wrote: > >> [snip] > > hope an inability to solve the problem posed by this advanced usage won't > > prevent a solution to a simpler problem from being accepted. I have waited until people started commenting on this patchset before replying. I think we agree on a few things to keep the discussion moving forward. 1. Stacked overlays are useful and make overlays easier to use. 2. Changing the overlay symbols format now would be unwise. 3. A number of extensions have been put forward/requested. 3.1. There should be a method to place a symbol on a node that didn't have one originally (due to vendor supplying broken DTB or being generated by firmware at runtime). 3.2. Scoping symbol visibility in case of clashes. This can the ability to put multiple path references to a single label/symbol. i.e. foo = "/path/bar", "/path/bar/baz"; Resolving the ambiguity would require the caller to provide it's 'location' on the tree. I.e. a device under /path/bar/baz would resolve to the latter. It is a big change semantically. Do you have anything else? Regards -- Pantelis -- 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
