On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:40:21 +0100, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 01:39:41PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > [...] > > I do think that each sequence should be contained within a single > > property, but I'm open to other suggestions. > > IIRC a very early prototype did implement something like that. However > because of the resource issues this had to be string based, so that the > sequences looked somewhat like (Alex, correct me if I'm wrong): > > power-on = <"REGULATOR", "power", 1, "GPIO", "enable", 1>; > > Instead we could possibly have something like: > > power-on = <0 ® 1, > 1 &gpio 42 0 1>; Yes, that would work, although I still think it would be a good idea to split the used resources off into the gpios/pwms/regs/etc properties. > Where the first cell in each entry defines the type (0 = regulator, 1 = > GPIO) and the rest would be a regular OF specifier for the given type of > resource along with some defined parameter such as enable/disable, > voltage, delay in ms, ... I don't know if that sounds any better. It > looks sort of cryptic but it is more "in the spirit of" DT, right Grant? It is still kind of a ham-handed approach, but it does fit better with existing conventions than the hierarchy of nodes does. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
