On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Pantelis Antoniou
<pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
>> On Oct 21, 2015, at 00:04 , Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Pantelis Antoniou
>> <pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> * A per overlay can_remove sysfs attribute that reports whether
>>> the overlay can be removed or not due to another overlapping overlay.
>>>
>>> * A target sysfs attribute listing the target of each fragment,
>>> in a group named after the name of the fragment.
[...]
>>> @@ -255,6 +278,17 @@ err_fail:
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static ssize_t target_show(struct kobject *kobj,
>>> + struct fragment_attribute *fattr, char *buf)
>>> +{
>>> + struct of_overlay_info *ovinfo = fattr->ovinfo;
>>> +
>>> + return snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%s\n",
>>> + of_node_full_name(ovinfo->target));
>>
>> This can be a link to the node itself, can't it?
>>
>
> Yes. Do you want it like this?
Yes, hence the suggestion. Unless you see some reason why not.
Rob
--
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
