Hi Grant, On Jun 27, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Grant Likely wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 14:59:31 -0500, Nathan Fontenot <nfont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 06/25/2014 03:22 PM, Grant Likely wrote: >>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:07:05 -0500, Nathan Fontenot <nfont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On 06/23/2014 09:58 AM, Grant Likely wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:33:20 +0300, Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> Hi Grant, >>>>>> [snip] >> >> This would affect property updates. When doing a property update the >> notifier passes a pointer to a struct containing a device node >> pointer and a pointer to the new device node property. >> >> I know specifically in memory property updates we grab the current version >> of the device tree property and compare it to the 'new' version that >> was passed to us. >> >> If you want to do the DT update before calling the notifier that should be >> fine for the memory update code and would only require very minimal >> updates. > > We could change the notifier to include both the old and new values. > > I've been thinking about changing the notifier format anyway. With the > addition of bulk changes, it would be more efficient to send a single > notifier for all the changes with a link to the change set instead of > one at a time. > That one has my vote. We also need a bulk change notifier, and for device driver use, some kind of wrapper for specific node/properties. At the moment a notification is fired for any change in the tree, we might work something more fine-grained. Like 'watch this node & subnodes', or 'watch this property (or set of properties)' > g. 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
