Hi,
All the examples of "barebox,state" compatible nodes I can find in
Barebox seem to follow this basic pattern:
/ {
/* ... */
aliases {
/* ... */
state = &state;
};
/* ... */
state: state {
magic = <0xdeadbeef>; /* or whatever */
compatible = "barebox,state";
/* ... */
};
/* ... */
};
Note that the alias name is the same as the node name in the above example.
However, when I try to follow that pattern for my own board, I get an
error (-EINVAL):
ERROR: register_device: already registered state
This is because the node "state" has been already registered as a device
called "state" by of_platform_device_create() (via of_probe() and
of_arm_init()). Later, the state device driver is initialized and
state_probe() is called on the device that was previously registered.
state_probe() calls state_new_from_node() which calls of_alias_get() to
get the name of the alias for this device (the alias is also called
"state" in this example), and calls state_new() with this alias name.
state_new() allocates a struct state with an embedded struct device_d,
sets the device name to the alias name it was called with ("state"), and
calls register_device() to register this embedded struct device_d. The
call to register_device() fails with return value -EINVAL because the
name is not unique.
I'm wondering if this has ever worked or whether there is a regression
bug. I fixed it on my board by renaming node to "state_nor", keeping
the alias name as "state".
I'm currently using Barebox 2018.12.0, but I don't see any relevant
changes in Barebox 2019.01.0 or barebox-next.
Best regards,
Ian Abbott.
--
-=( Ian Abbott <abbotti@xxxxxxxxx> || Web: www.mev.co.uk )=-
-=( MEV Ltd. is a company registered in England & Wales. )=-
-=( Registered number: 02862268. Registered address: )=-
-=( 15 West Park Road, Bramhall, STOCKPORT, SK7 3JZ, UK. )=-
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
