On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 03:50:37PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 15:45 Fri 17 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote: > > Hi J, > > > > On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 01:27:37PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > if you specify id = 0 the next available id will be taken > > > otherwise fail if already registered > > > > I think we need a better solution here. Being able to specify an id > > is a good idea in general, but since 0 is a valid id we should be able > > to specify exactly this id aswell. > > An idea is to use -1 for a dynamic id, but of course this needs changes > > to all existing devices. > I prefer to do it a second step > in this case I prefer doing it first, because it makes sure the problem is getting solved. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
