Wrapping proprietary nodes

[David Gibson]

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 02:44:54PM -0700, David VomLehn wrote:
> I expect my device tree will have some proprietary, one-off devices in
> it. Is it better to wrap these all up in one node:
> 
> 	cisco {
> 		device1 {
> 			...
> 		};
> 		device2 {
> 			...
> 		};
> 	};
> 
> Or should they be specified one node at a time:
> 
> 	cisco-device1 {
> 		...
> 	};
> 	cisco-device2 {
> 		...
> 	};
> 
> My inclination is for the former, but I'd prefer to follow existing
> usage, if any.

Um.. what do you mean by "proprietary nodes".  What is the reason from
a hardware perspective that the devices would be logically grouped
together?

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson