On 5 June 2014 16:42, Matt Porter <mporter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 03:51:55PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote: > >> BTW, here we at least have a hardware resource to specify in the DT >> node, there are examples in kernel where the DT nodes are purely >> virtual. For ex, grep for "linux,spdif-dit". So I think we should be >> ok. >> > > There's a bit of a difference between my concern over a virtual node and > this example you've cited. In the dummy spdif transmitter, it's defining > a virtual device that plugs in for a codec, a hardware concept well > defined in the audio bindings. I agree that there are many examples of > this type of virtual node, including dummy phys, but in all cases they > are stubbing out a real hardware concept. > > I find it to be distinctly different to create a node that doesn't > represent the hardware's use of mailboxes. > The way I see "cpm_ipc" is that it represents a device that doesn't need MMIO or an IRQ, but only the mailbox hardware resource. "linux,spdif-dit" needs no hardware resource at all. So if anything, more "virtual" than cpm_ipc. > I'd be happy if a DT > maintainer could say that this is acceptable though. ;) > OK, though it becomes clear only after reading this ;) Cheers -Jassi -- 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
