On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Pantelis Antoniou
<pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
>> On Oct 21, 2015, at 00:54 , Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>
> Nope, can’t be done. The sysfs API only allows linking one kobj to another.
> The kobj is the overlay but the target is in the fragment attribute group.
Can't we make the fragments kobj's as well?
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
