> >> > + soc {
> >> > + sbc_serial0: serial@9530000 {
> >> > + status = "okay";
> >> > + };
> >>
> >> You might want to consider reference-based syntax here instead, so you
> >> don't have to mimic the hierarchy. That'd be (at the root level of the
> >> file, below this secion:
> >>
> >> &sbc_serial0: {
> >> status = "okay";
> >> };
> >
> > I'm personally not keen on this scheme. It's sometimes helpful to know
> > the hierarchy and I don't think it's a large overhead to format the
> > subordinate DTS files in this way.
> >
> > Please consider not enforcing this.
>
> Definitely not enforcing it, and I didn't use to like it either but it
> has some real upsides.
>
> In particular, it saves a lot of grief when you're changing something
> like the unit-id of a node in .dtsi and forget to do the same update
> in the dts.
I'm not entirely sure what a unit-id is, but I can see that there
would be benefits to using the referenced-based syntax as you call
it. If any of those benefits hold true here I won't push back, but I
would personally like to see us default to the hierarchical scheme.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
