On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 02:59:01PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 11/13/2013 01:49 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > No, with DT you can say that if there is no DT binding configuring
> > a given thing (clock, regulator, GPIO or whatever) then no amount
> > of module loading will ever cause it to appear - this is what the
> > flag in question controls.
> But we do have a binding for regulators, so wouldn't that flag always
> be true?
In theory. In practice people often add bindings for devices without
including the regulators and then someone comes along and adds the
regulators later, perhaps not even using a system with DT, and renders
all existing DTs buggy. This is generally miserable for everyone so
it's better if we're liberal in what we accept.
> Perhaps you can suggest a name for the flag, and a specific set of
> conditions when it will have specific values. That might help me
> understand what you mean.
Well, of_have_populated_dt() is essentially doing the same thing
(probably, I don't know if it's set at quite the right time) - it's
saying we have a DT. We could even change the users to check that as
well if it's doing the right thing.
> Are you confusing having a binding (schema definition) with having DT
> content ("foo-supply" property)?
No.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
