On 11/13/2012 8:29 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 11/13/2012 11:10 AM, Mitch Bradley wrote: >> It seems to me that this capebus discussion is missing an important >> point. The name capebus suggests that it is a bus, so there should be a >> parent node to represent that bus. It should have a driver whose API >> implements all of the system-interface functions a cape needs. > > It was discussed earlier that capebus isn't actually a bus. It's simply > a collection of a bunch of pins from the SoC hooked up to connectors. > I'd agree that it's mis-named. > Nevertheless, to the extent that the set of pins is finite and well-defined, it should be possible to define a set of software interfaces to support the functionality represented by those pins. It might depend on the underlying SoC, but even so, it would still be best to encapsulate the interface set. I hear all these use cases that presuppose a wide variety of user skill sets. If one really wants to support such users well, it's important to define a coherent single point of interface. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
