Hi Geert,
> On Jan 20, 2015, at 17:24 , Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> + Examples:
>>> +
>>> + %pO /foo/bar@0 - Node full name
>>> + %pO0 /foo/bar@0 - Same as above
>>> + %pO1 /foo/bar@0[10] - Node full name + phandle
>>> + %pO2 /foo/bar@0[10:DdPB] - Node full name + phandle + node flags
>>> + D - dynamic
>>> + d - detached
>>> + P - Populated
>>> + B - Populated bus
>>
>> We should think about what else we want to print for a node. Perhaps
>> 'On' for name, 'Oc' for compatible, etc.
>
> I was just going to say "The least verbose variant is name, not full_name”.
>
Unfortunately in the context of device tree nodes ‘name' is usually not what
you want to print to identify the node in question. ‘name’ is usually not unique.
We can add a format specifier for it though.
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
Regards
— Pantelis
--
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
