[RFC] Device Tree Overlays Proposal (Was Re: capebus moving omap_devices to mach-omap2)

[Stephen Warren]

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.